Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Life Links 11/6/07

Dr. Kenneth Stevens on nearly 10 years of assisted suicide in Oregon. HT: Wesley Smith

The New York Times profiles abortionist Susan Wicklund.
But Dr. Wicklund acknowledges that abortion is an issue fraught with dilemmas. In the book, she describes witnessing, as a medical student, the abortion of a 21-week fetus. She writes that at the sight of its tiny arm she decided she would perform abortions only in the first trimester of pregnancy. She says late-term abortions should be legal, but her decision means she occasionally sees desperate women she must refuse to help.

Dr. Wicklund describes her horror when she aborted the pregnancy of a woman who had been raped, only to discover, by examining the removed tissue, that the pregnancy was further along than she or the woman had thought — and that she had destroyed an embryo the woman and her husband had conceived together.

The Los Angeles Times has a review of the book "Choice: True Stories of Birth, Contraception, Infertility, Adoption, Single Parenthood & Abortion."

The review begins with this question from the book:
DO the pro-lifers truly believe that women who have abortions do so carelessly, callously, without a second thought?
Huh? On one hand you have pro-choicers who claim that prolifers believe that all women who have abortions have some kind of serious post-abortion regret and then you have other pro-choicers who think prolifers believe women callously have abortions without a second thought. Would you get your story straight. Which is it?

Or maybe neither of those strawmen is true.

Prakriti Mishra has probably the least persuasive editorial in favor of human cloning I've ever read. It's in the Chicago Maroon, a student paper at the University of Chicago.

Carnegie Mellon researchers have "developed cell-instructive microcapsules that contain the genetically engineered neural stem cells" to prevent "an inflammatory response and would cause the stem cells to differentiate into mature cell types which would not be clinically effective."
The idea behind the technology being developed is to give clinicians the ability to genetically engineer neural cells from the patient, re-implant them and remotely control their actions in non-invasive ways.

No comments:

Post a Comment