Ereno.irish

7/31/2019 Ereno.irish

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/erenoirish 1/10

URL link: http://old.usccb.org/prolife/programs/rlp/Mindling05.shtml

Buod/Reaksyon: Gaano man kalala ang karamdaman ng isang pasyente, wala pa rin tayong

karapatan upang ilagay ang taong ito sa kamatayan. Lahat tayo ay biniyayaan ng Diyos ng

karapatan at dignidad na mabuhay. Wala sinuman sa atin ang may karapatan upang alisin ito

sa sinuman. Wala sinuman sa atin ang pwedeng makapagsabi kung kalian, saan, at papaanotayo mamamatay, kungdi ang Diyos lamang. Siya ang nagbigay, kaya Siya lang ang may

kaarapatan upang bawiin ito sa sinuman. Ang buhay ang siyang pinakamahalaga at

pinakamagandang ipinagkaloob sa atin ng Poong Maykapal. Dahil rito ay nabigyan tayo ng

pagkakataon upang patunayan ang ating sarili sa Kanya. Ang tulungan at mapasaya, hindi

lamang ang ating mga sarili, kundi pati na rin ang mga taong nasa paligid natin. Kaya naman

malaking kakulangan ito kung hahayaan na lamang natin itong kunin ng iba. Ang euthanasia ay

siyang pinagandang ngalan lamang sa salitang “pagpatay.” Kailangan nating sugpuin ang

kaisipang ito na nagsasabing matatapos lang ang paghihirap ng isang tao, kung matatapos na

rin ang siyang buhay nito. Kailangan nating respetuhin anf dignidad ng isang tao, dignidad na

hindi pinagkaloob ng bansa sa tao, kundi ng Diyos sa tao. Ang tanging layunin lamang ng

medisina ay ang panatilihin at pangalagaan ang buhay ng tao, isang proopesyon na hindiginagamit upang sirain at tapusin ito. Hindi natin sila pinapatay, bagkus ay binubuhay. Isang

bagay na dapat tandaan ng bawat doctor hindi lang sa bansa, kundi pati na rin sa buong

mundo.

Bilang isang Katoliko, naniniwala rin ako sa kahalagahan ng buhay. Isa itong biyaya na dapat

lang nating respetuhin at pangalagaan habang tayo’y nabubuhay. Habang binabasa ko ang

artikulong ito, panay na sumasagi sa isip ko ang pang-anim na utos ng Diyos, ang “wag kang

papatay. Sinasabi rito na hindi natin dapat tapusin ang buhay ng sinuman, maski na rin pati ang

sarili nating buhay. Mahalaga ito, sa loob pa man ng sinapupunan hanggang sa mismong oras

ng pagkamatay nito. Trabaho ng mga doctor upang gawin ito, ang protektahan at alagaan ang

buhay ng bawat mamamayan. Ang magligtas at hindi pumatay. Nauunawaan ko ang pagnanais

nilang takasan na ang paghihirap na nararamdaman gamit ang euthanasia. Marahil ay gusto na

lang nilang matapos na ang lahat. Ito na lang din siguro ang nakikita nilang solusyon para dito.

Naiintindihan at nirerespeto ko ito. Pero hindi ko yata kayang hayaang mangyari ito sa mga

taong pinakamamahal ko, lalong-lalo na sa pamilya ko, sa mga magulang ko. Siguro kung

gagawa sila ng sulat ukol rito, tiyak na igagalang ko ang magiging desisyon nila… pero parang

hindi ko yata kayang gawin na ako mismo ang siyang magtatanggal ng life support nila.

Masyadong masakit yata iyon para sa akin…lalo na ang kaisipan nilang wala na rin daw silbi

kung bubuhayin pa nila sila o hindi, dahil magiging pabigat lang daw ito, hindi lamang sa

pamilya kundi pati na rin sa mismong may sakit. Walang silbi. Oo, walang silbi. Pabigat. Pero

ang tao ay tao, hindi isang bagay na kapag nasira ay itatapon na lang. Mahalaga ang buhay ngbawat nilalang. Maski ba parang lantang gulay na lang siya, may buhay pa rin siya na dapat

nating pangalagaan. Sa panahon natin ngayon, wala tayong ibang pinahahalagahan kundi ang

sarili nating kalayaan. Dahil ditto, naniniwala sila na kaya na nilang gawin ang anumang gusto

nila, na walang sinumang ang pwedeng makapigil sa kanila, na sila lang ang dapat

magdesisyon kung kalian at papaano sila mamatay. Naniniwala tayo na kaya nating kontrolin

ang lahat, na kaya nating solusyunan ang lahat, alisin ang sakit at paghihirap. Pero iba ito sa

turo ng Simbahan. Hindi tayo nananalangin upang makatakas sa mga problema, bagkus ay

http://old.usccb.org/prolife/programs/rlp/Mindling05.shtml






nanalangin tayo upang humingi ng karampatang lakas upang wag sumuko, upang tuluyang

panatilihin at maintindihan ang buhay na siyang pinagkaloob Niya sa atin. Habang binabasa ko

ang artikulong ito, naiisip ko ang mga pwedeng mangyari kung sakali mang gawin nilang legal

ang nasabing gawain. Hindi ito tama. Hindi ito katanggap-tanggap. Hahayaan na lang ba natin

ang isa’t-isa na magpatayan na lang sa ngalan ng euthanasia? Ito ba ang nais nating maging

kahitnan ng bansa? Masasabi nga lang bang mahalaga ang isang buhay kung ikaw ay malusogat wala ng iba? Tayo nga ba talaga ang dapat na magdesisyon sa ating buhay? Wala nga ba

talagang halaga ang minsang sakit at paghihirap na maaari nating maranasan paminsan-

minsan? Syempre hindi. Isang malaking HINDI. Sana ay marami pang tao ang maliwanagan

tungkol sa usaping ito, tulad na lang ng nangyari sakin matapos kong basahin ang artikulong

ito. Protektahan ang buhay, wag sana natin itong balewalain na lamang.

Pope John Paul II: Dying with Dignity

Reverend J. Daniel Mindling, O.F.M. Cap.

The teaching of Pope John Paul II about sickness and death came not only from his speeches,

addresses, and encyclicals. He instructed just as convincingly with the witness of his own faith

in the face of injury, suffering, hospitalization, illness and dying. He gave this catechesis for

years.

He taught us that to understand death with dignity, first accept the dignity of life. Human dignity

is an undeserved gift, not an earned status. The dignity of life springs from its source . We come

to be by the loving action of God the Creator. "What is man that you are mindful of him, and the

son of man that you care for him? You have made him little less than a god, and crown him withglory and honor" (Psalm 8:5). The dignity of life is beyond price . We have been ransomed not

with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:18-

19).The dignity of life is clear from our calling. God's plan for human beings is that they should

"be conformed to the image of his Son" (Romans 8:29). "For God created man for incorruption,

and made him in the image of his own eternity" (Wisdom 2:23). i

All who respect their God-given dignity are called to be heralds of a "culture of life." Christ's

mission was to every human person, and our Lord had a passionate concern for the sick, the

suffering, and the dying. In our own time, Christ continues his mission, and his preference for

the vulnerable, through his Church. Christ looks mercifully upon us now and at the hour of our

death, and the Church proclaims solidarity with our brothers and sisters at the end of their

earthly journey. The Church is a patient advocate , working to ensure proper care for the sick

and dying by promoting respect for their dignity. The Church is physician and nurse , the Good

Samaritan who treats the wounded and abandoned and never walks by. The Church is also

the innkeeper who provides the hospital, nursing home, and hospice for care and

comfort.ii Pope John Paul, who was no stranger to sickness and suffering, raised the prophetic



voice of the Church compassionately, often insisting on the care which is due to the sick and

dying.

Traditionally, Catholics have prayed for the grace of a happy death: From a sudden

and unprovided death, deliver us, O Lord . Now, advances in modern medicine increasingly pose

the challenge of coping with a terminal illness which may last months or even years. Ratherthan worrying only about a sudden death, many today confront fears of a prolonged and

debilitating illness, of being a burden on others, and of facing a path possibly marked by

suffering. iii

"The church knows that the moment of death is always accompanied by particularly intense

human sentiments: an earthy life is ending, the emotional, generational, and social ties that are

part of the person's inner self are dissolving; people who are dying and those who assist them

are aware of the conflict between hope in immortality and the unknown which troubles even the

most enlightened minds. The church lifts her voice so that the dying are not offended but are

given every loving care and are not left alone as they prepare to cross the threshold of time to

enter eternity."iv

"The awareness that the dying person will soon meet God for all eternity should impel his or her

relatives, loved ones, the medical, health-care and religious personnel, to help him or her in this

decisive phase of life, with concern that pays attention to every aspect of existence, including

the spiritual."v

And while true compassion "encourages every reasonable effort for the patient's recovery [, at]

the same time, it helps draw the line when it is clear that no further treatment will serve this

purpose. The refusal of aggressive treatment is neither a rejection of the patient nor of his or her

life. Indeed, the object of the decision on whether to begin or to continue a treatment hasnothing to do with the value of the patient's life, but rather with whether such medical

intervention is beneficial for the patient. The possible decision either not to start or to halt a

treatment will be deemed ethically correct if the treatment is ineffective or obviously

disproportionate to the aims of sustaining life or recovering health. Consequently, the decision

to forego aggressive treatment is an expression of the respect that is due to the patient at every

moment."vi From the patient's perspective, this is not "giving up" nor disregarding the obligation

to care for oneself, rather, it is an acceptance of the human condition in the face of life

threatening illness.vii

Especially at the end of life, when it is clear that death is imminent and inevitable no matter what

medical procedures are attempted, one may refuse treatment "that would only secure aprecarious and burdensome prolongation of life, so long as the normal care due to the sick

person in similar cases is not interrupted."viii Even at the stage of terminal illness when

proportionate and effective treatment is no longer possible, however, palliative care is still

appropriate and needed. The aim of such care can include alleviating many kinds of physical,

psychological and mental suffering. Such care, said John Paul II, may involve a team of



specialists with medical, psychological and religious qualifications who work together to support

the patient in facing death.ix

Dying often includes pain and suffering.x Pope John Paul II admitted to his own personal

sufferings, and proclaimed that these offered him a new source of strength for his ministry as

Pope.xi

We read in Evangelium Vitae (no. 67): "Living to the Lord ...means recognizing thatsuffering, while still an evil and a trial in itself, can always become a source of good. It becomes

such if it is experienced for love and with love through sharing, by God's gracious gift and one's

own personal and free choice, in the suffering of Christ Crucified. In this way, the person who

lives his suffering in the Lord grows more fully conformed to him (cf. Phil 3:10; 1 Pet 2:21) and

more closely associated with his redemptive work on behalf of the Church and humanity. This

was the experience of Saint Paul, which every person who suffers is called to relive: 'I rejoice in

my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for

the sake of his Body, that is, the Church' (Col 1:24)."

Ethical questions can arise regarding the use of pain medication. Pain should be managed in

such a way as to allow patients to prepare for death while fully conscious. The dying should be

kept as free of pain as possible. Some wish to blur the distinction between the use of medication

to manage pain even at the risk of hastening the dying process, and the deliberate

administration of a lethal overdose of pain medication. Those who claim the latter

is mercy killing fail to recognize that true "compassion" leads to sharing another's pain; it does

not kill the person whose suffering we cannot bear.xii

Sadly, there are physicians who see their role as assisting patients to end their own lives. What

a tragedy it is that the very people trained to heal the injured and care for the sick, have become

dealers in death. Pope John Paul II was blunt in his condemnation. Even if a patient requests

assisted suicide, it remains an "inexcusable injustice." Although controversies over physicianassisted suicide might seem to have come up only in our own time, he quotes St. Augustine

who wrote over 1500 years ago: "it is never licit to kill another: even if he should wish it, indeed

if he request it because, hanging between life and death, he begs for help in freeing the soul

struggling against the bonds of the body and longing to be released; nor is it licit even when a

sick person is no longer able to live."xiii

Especially in light of the tragic case of Terri Schiavo, Pope John Paul II left no doubt about the

Church's clear teaching regarding those in a so-called "persistent vegetative state" (PVS). In the

opinion of their doctors, these patients have suffered such severe neurological damage that

they can no longer give any indication that they are aware of themselves or of their

environment. It is unfortunate that their state is labeled "vegetative." Human persons are not

vegetables. Such regrettable terminology may lead some to conclude falsely that these

handicapped persons are more like vegetables than human beings. This is simply not true. All

disabled persons have basic rights.xiv Although their higher cognitive functions may be seriously

impaired, these patients are human beings with the same intrinsic value and personal dignity as

any other human person.



Caution should be exercised even regarding the diagnosis of PVS. It is true that the longer such

a state persists, the less likely the patient will recover. Nevertheless, at times this label is

applied incorrectly, and there are more than a few cases reported in the literature of persons

who have emerged from a "vegetative" state after appropriate treatment or who have recovered

at least partially, even after many years. "We can thus state that medical science, up till now, is

still unable to predict with certainty those, among patients in this condition, who will recover andwho will not."xv

PVS patients, like all other patients, have a right to basic health care. They should be kept

comfortable, clean, and warm. Care should be taken to prevent complications associated with

being confined to bed. They should be given appropriate rehabilitative care and monitored for

signs of improvement. Families who bear the heavy burden of dealing with this condition should

be assisted by the rest of society, as true solidarity demands.

Pope John Paul II also resolved a long standing debate about life sustaining care for PVS

patients. He taught unequivocally that there is a moral obligation on care providers. These

patients should be provided food and water, even when these are supplied through a feeding

tube. It is unjust to refuse to initiate or continue such basic care based on the quality of their life

or on a claim that such care is too expensive. It is unjust to discontinue it even because of a

decreased hope for recovery. John Paul II's statement is explicit. Nutrition and hydration is a

natural means of preserving life, and "should be considered, in principle, ordinary and

proportionate, and as such morally obligatory, insofar as and until it is seen to have attained its

proper finality, which in the present case consists in providing nourishment to the patient and

alleviation of his suffering."xvi

Patients often want to direct their care in the event that they become unable to communicate

their wishes. The Holy Father's statement that PVS patients should be given nutrition andhydration, as part of the ordinary care to which all are entitled, raises questions about advance

directives. Living wills should not include a statement that refuses nutrition and hydration in the

event that one is diagnosed in a persistent vegetative state. It is, in principle, ordinary and

proportionate care which is morally obligatory.

There is great confusion about death with dignity. What John Paul II rightly called the "culture of

death" disregards the sanctity and dignity of life, and so misunderstands dying. It claims that life

has value only to the extent that it is productive, when it brings pleasure and well being. In this

vision, "death is considered "senseless" if it suddenly interrupts a life still open to a future of new

and interesting experiences. But it becomes a "rightful liberation" once life is held to be no

longer meaningful because it is filled with pain and inexorably doomed to even greatersuffering."xvii

Because the culture of death disregards God, it also overestimates human autonomy with

respect to life. Within the culture of death, "the fear of a prolonged or painful death and

concerns about being a burden on loved ones tempts some to try to take control of death and

bring it about before its time, "gently" ending one's own life or the life of others." xviii



By contrast, a culture of life will reject all forms of euthanasia. Euthanasia is "an action or

omission which of itself and by intention causes death, with the purpose of eliminating all

suffering."xix It is "a grave violation of the Law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally

unacceptable killing of a human person."xx "Euthanasia is one of those tragedies caused by an

ethic that claims to dictate who should live and who should die. Even if it is motivated by

sentiments of a misconstrued compassion or of a misunderstood preservation of dignity,euthanasia actually eliminates the person instead of relieving the individual of suffering."xxi

"Even when not motivated by a selfish refusal to be burdened with the life of someone who is

suffering, euthanasia must be called a false mercy , and indeed a disturbing "perversion" of

mercy. True "compassion" leads to sharing another's pain; it does not kill the person whose

suffering we cannot bear. Moreover, the act of euthanasia appears all the more perverse if it is

carried out by those, like relatives, who are supposed to treat a family member with patience

and love, or by those, such as doctors, who by virtue of their specific profession are supposed

to care for the sick person even in the most painful terminal stages."xxii

"None of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. If we live, we live to the Lord, and

if we die, we die to the Lord; so then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's"

( Rom 14:7-8).Dying to the Lord means experiencing one's death as the supreme act of

obedience to the Father (cf. Phil 2:8), being ready to meet death at the "hour" willed and chosen

by him (cf. Jn 13:1), which can only mean when one's earthly pilgrimage is completed." xxiii

Last but not least, respect for the dignity and sanctity of life of patients includes concern for their

spiritual needs. "The terminally ill in particular deserve the solidarity, communion and affection

of those around them; they often need to be able to forgive and to be forgiven, to make peace

with God and with others." The sacrament of the sick, confession, and viaticum acknowledge

and celebrate the very relationship with God through which we have received the dignity andsanctity of life, especially as a prelude to the final journey to our Father's house. xxiv

John Paul II never tired of praying for the help of the Mother of God, especially for the sick and

dying. No summary of his catechesis is complete without turning our eyes to our Mother who

stood vigil at the cross of her Son. "I entrust all of you to the Most Holy Virgin ... may she help

every Christian to witness that the only authentic answer to pain, suffering and death is Christ

our Lord, who died and rose for us."xxv



URL link: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/lej/lej_02whenlifebegins.html

Buod/Reaksyon: Mula pa sa sinapupunan ng ina, may buhay na ang bata, isa na siyang tao.

Sa fertilization pa lang, kumpleto na ang genetic makeup niya. Masasabi na natin kung ano ang

kasarian niya, kung anong kulay ng balat niya, ng mata, ng buhok, o kaya naman ay kung

gaano siya katangkad paglaki. Nagsisimula ng dumaloy ang dugo sa kanyang katawan,nagsisimula ng tumibok ang kanyang puso’t nagsisimula na rin siyang gumalaw. Ang tanging

kailangan na lang niya ngayon upang maging isang ganap na tao ay ang pagkakataon niya

upang lumaki at tuluyan pang makumpleto ang iba pang parte ng kanyang katawan.

Nakalulungkot isipin na hanggang ngayon, hindi pa rin tao ang turing sa kanila, kundi mga fetus

lamang na ayos lang ipalaglag kung kailan man nila gustuhin.

Habang binabasa ko ang artikulong ito ay para akong lalong nabubuhayan ng dugo. Sa

panahon natin ngayon kung saan patuloy na pinabababa ng lipunan ang halaga ng buhay ng

isang tao, lalo na ng mga hindi pa pinapanganak, masaya ako na ang siyensya na rin ang

mismong nagsasabi na ang mga batang ito ay ganap nang tao sa sinapupunan pa lang. Sa

sinapupunan pa lang, sinisimulan na tayong buhayin ng Diyos, kasama na natin ang Diyos. Angpagpapalaglag sa bata ay matatawag na rin nating isang tipo ng pagpatay. Pumapasok sa isip

ko ang mga babaeng ginahasa’t pinagsamantalahan. Oo’t nakikisimpatya ako sa kanila. Alam

kong mahirap ang pinagdaraanan nila. Pero hindi ang pagpatay sa inosenteng sanggol ang

wastong solusyon para dito. Kayo pa rin ang magulang niya, wala siyang ibang aasahan kundi

kayo lang. Pero kung hindi niyo talaga kayang alagaan siya, mas maganda siguro kung

ipaaampon niyo na lamang siya sa mga taong magmahal sa kanya, imbes na pagkaitan niyo

siya ng karapatan na dapat lang naman na meron siya, at yun ay ang mabuhay. Wala siyang

kasalanan, kaya hindi siya ang dapat na parusahan sa pagkakamali ng kanyang ama. Wala

silang dapat ipangamba…dahil tiyak na gagawa ang Diyos ng paraan upang tulungan sila,

upang maging masaya sila, walang dahilan para patayin pa nila ang bata. Ang tao ay tao,

gaano man ito kaliit. Sa kasamaang palad, kakaunti lang yata ang nakaaalam nito. Pilit silang

gumagawa ng sarili nilang depinisyon ng buhay at pagiging tao base sa baluktot nilang

pagtingin sa tamang kaugalian. Sa aking opinyon, base na rin sa aking mga nabasa’t mga

narinig, kailanman ay hindi dapat maging unang opsyon ang pagpapalaglag sa bata. Sapat na

ang malaman nating sa sinapupunan pa lang ay ganap na siyang tao upang isilang ito. Ang

kasalanan ay kasalanan, pero kung pagsisihan, lahat ay mabibigyan ng kapatawaran. Ang

pagpapalaglag sa bata ay isang mabigat na paglabag hindi lang sa dignidad at karapatan ng

tao upang mabuhay kundi pati na rin sa kung anong nais ng Diyos para sa ikabubuti natin. Pero

kung hihingi lang tayo ng patawad sa kanya at sa mga batang pinatay natin, tiyak na

mapapatawad pa rin tayo ng Diyos, dahil ang Diyos ay isang mapagmahal at mapagpatawad na

ama. Tulad natin, isa rin siyang magulang, isa rin siyang ama. Ngayon, inuulit ko, ang tao aytao, gaano man ito kaliit.

When Does Human Life Begin?

Given before a U.S. Senate Judiciary subcommittee.

http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/lej/lej_02whenlifebegins.html






Jerome Lejeune

Reproduced with Permission

When does a person begin? I will try to give the most precise answer to that question actually

available to science. Modern biology teaches us that ancestors are united to their progeny by a

continuous material link, for it is from the fertilization of the female cell (the ovum) by the malecell (the spermatozoa) that a new member of the species will emerge. Life has a very, very long

history but each individual has a very neat beginning: the moment of its conception.

The material link is the molecular thread of DNA. In each reproductive cell, this ribbon, roughly

one meter long, is cut into pieces (23 in our species). Each segment is carefully coiled and

packaged (like a magnetic tape in a minicassette) so that under the microscope it appears like a

little rod, a chromosome.

As soon as the 23 paternally derived chromosomes are united, through fertilization, to the 23

maternal ones, the full genetic information necessary and sufficient to express all the inborn

qualities of the new individual is gathered. Exactly as the introduction of a minicassette inside a

tape recorder will allow the restitution of the symphony, the new being begins to express himself

as soon as he has been conceived.

Natural sciences and the sciences of law speak the same language. Of an individual enjoying a

robust health - a biologist would say that he has a good constitution -of a society developing

itself harmoniously to the benefit of all its members, a legislator would state that it has an

equitable constitution.

Nature works the same way. The chromosomes are the tables of the law of life, and when they

have been gathered in the new being (the voting process is the fertilization), they fully spell-out

his personal constitution.

What is bewildering is the minuteness of the scripture. It is hard to believe, although beyond any

possible doubt, that the whole genetic information necessary and sufficient to build our body

and even our brain, the most powerful problem-solving device, even able to analyze the laws of

the universe, could be epitomized so that its material substratum could fit neatly on the point of

a needle!

Even more impressive, during the maturation of the reproductive cells, the genetic information is

reshuffled in so many ways that each conceptus receives an entirely original combination that

has never occurred before and will never again. Each conceptus is unique, and thus

irreplaceable. Identical twins and true hermaphrodites (abnormal individuals having both male

and female reproductive organs) are exceptions to the rule: one man, one genetic make-up; but

interestingly enough, these exceptions have to take place at the time of conception. Later

accidents could not lead to harmonious development.



All these facts were known long ago and everybody was agreeing that test-tube babies, if

produced, would demonstrate the autonomy of the conceptus, over which the test tube has no

title of property. Test-tube babies now do exist.

If the ovum of a cow is fertilized by a bull's sperm, the conceptus, floating freely in liquid, starts

its cattle's career. Normally it would travel for a week, through the Fallopian tube, and reach theuterus. But thanks to technology it can travel much farther, even across the ocean!

The best shipping equipment for such a two-milligram cattle being is to introduce it inside the

Fallopian tube of a female rabbit. (Air freight is much less than for a pregnant cow.) At

destination, the minuscule animal is carefully removed and delicately settled inside the uterus of

a recipient cow. Months after, the calf exhibits all the genetic endowment it received from its true

parents (the donors of the ovum and of the sperm) and none of the qualities of its temporary

container (the rabbit) nor of its uterine foster mother.

How many cells are needed to build an individual? Recent experiments spell out the answer. If

very early conceptuses of mice are artificially disassembled (by a peculiar enzymatic treatment),

their cells come apart. By mixing such suspensions of cells, coming from different embryos, one

sees them reassembling again. If the tiny mass is then implanted in a recipient female, some

little mice (very few indeed) manage to develop to term, completely normal. As theoretically

expected and demonstrated, a chimeric mouse can derive from two or even three embryos, but

no more. The maximum number of cells cooperating to the elaboration of an individual is three.

In full accordance with this empirical demonstration, the fertilized egg normally cleaves itself in

two cells, one of them dividing again, thus forming the surprising odd number of three,

encapsulated inside their protective bag, the zone pellucida.

To the best of our actual knowledge, the prerequisite for individuation (a stage containing three

fundamental cells) is the next step following conception, minutes after it. All this explains why

(British) Drs. (Robert) Edwards and (Patrick) Steptoe could witness in vitro (outside the living

body, in a test tube) the fertilization of a ripe ovum from Mrs. (Lesley) Brown by a spermatozoa

from Mr. (Gilbert) Brown. The tiny conceptus they were implanting days later in the womb of

Mrs. Brown could not be a tumor or an animal. It was in fact the incredibly young Louise Brown,

now three years old.

The viability of a conceptus is extraordinary. Experimentally, a mouse conceptus can be deep

frozen (even to -269c) and, after careful thawing, implanted successfully. For further growth,

only a recipient uterine mucosa can supply the embryonic placenta with appropriate nutriments.

In his lifecapsule, the amniotic bag, the early being is just as viable as an astronaut on the moon

in his space-suit: refueling with vital fluids is required from the mother-ship. This nurture is

indispensable for survival, but it does not "make" the baby, no more than the most sophisticated



space shuttle can produce an astronaut. Such a comparison becomes even more cogent when

the fetus moves.

Thanks to a refined sonar-like imagery, Dr. Ian Donald, from England, a year ago succeeded in

producing a movie featuring the youngest star in the world, an 11-week-old baby dancing in

utero (in the uterus). The baby plays, so to speak, on a trampoline! He bends his knees, pusheson the wall, soars up and falls down again. Because his body has the same buoyancy as the

amniotic fluid, he does not feel gravity and performs his dance in a very slow, graceful, and

elegant way, impossible in any other place on the Earth. Only astronauts in their gravity-free

state can achieve such gentleness of motion. (By the way, for the first walk in space,

technologists had to decide where to attach the tubes carrying the fluids. They finally chose the

belt buckle of the suit, reinventing the umbilical cord.)

When I had the honor of testifying previously before the Senate, I took the liberty of referring to

the universal fairy-tale of the man smaller than the thumb. At two months of age, the human

being is less than one thumb's length from the head to the rump. He would fit at ease in anutshell, but everything is there: hands, feet, head, organs, brain, all are in place. His heart has

been beating for a month already. Looking closely, you would see the palm creases and a

fortune teller would read the good adventure of that tiny person. With a good magnifier the

fingerprints could be detected. Every document is available for a national identity card.

With the extreme sophistication of our technology, we have invaded his privacy. Special

hydrophones reveal the most primitive music: a deep, profound, reassuring hammering at some

60-70 per minute (the maternal heart) and a rapid, high-pitched cadence at some 150-170 (the

heart of the fetus). These, mixed, mimic those of the counterbass and of the maracas, which are

the basic rhythms of any pop music.

We now know what he feels, we have listened to what he hears, smelled what he tastes and we

have really seen him dancing full of grace and youth. Science has turned the fairytale of Tom

Thumb into a true story, the one each of us has lived in the womb of his mother.

And to let you measure how precise the detection can be: if at the beginning, just after

conception, days before implantation, a single cell was removed from the little berry-looking

individual, we could cultivate that cell and examine its chromosomes. If a student, looking at it

under the microscope, could not recognize the number, the shape and the banding pattern of

these chromosomes, if he was not able to tell safely whether it comes from a chimpanzee beingor from a human being, he would fail in his examination.

To accept the fact that, after fertilization has taken place, a new human has come into being is

no longer a matter of taste or of opinion. The human nature of the human being from conception

to old age is not a metaphysical contention. It is plain experimental evidence.

Ereno.irish

Documents

Transcript of Ereno.irish