INTRODUCTION
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Idrinstitute.jpg")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/2024.lidw_.jpg")
OCTOBER 5: Today my life began. My parents do not know it yet, but it is I already. And I am to be a girl. I shall have blonde hair and blue eyes. Just about everything is settled though, even the fact that I shall love flowers.
OCTOBER 19: Some say that I am not a real person yet, that only my mother exists. But I am a real person, just as a small crumb of bread is yet truly bread. My mother is. And I am.
OCTOBER 23: My mouth is just beginning to open now. Just think in a year or so I shall be laughing and later talking. I know what my first word will be “MAMA”. DECEMBER 24: I wonder if mom hears the whispering of my heart? Some children come into the world a little sick. But my heart is strong and healthy. It beats so evenly: tup-tup, tup-tup. You’ll have a healthy little daughter mom! DECEMBER 28: Today my mother killed me.[1]
This is the quote of an anonymous allowing us hear the thoughts and feelings of the unborn child who was just 2 months and 23 days and who, like many others killed before and after her, very often do not have a chance to express and speak for themselves. Every nation, developed or underdeveloped, links its future to the status of a child. Childhood holds the potential and also sets the limit to the future development of a society. As majority of the world agrees, Children are the greatest gift to humanity as they signify the greatest optimism in human development and humanity as a whole.
If these children are deprived of their childhood legally, economically, socially, physically, spiritually and mentally by killing them even before they are born, they get denied the opportunity to enjoy the gift of life, the exercise of their human rights which they possess even as foetus, coupled with the fact that, our nation gets deprived of potential human resources for social progress, economic empowerment, peace and order, social stability and good citizenship. It is actually a lose-lose on both parts.
It has always been from the inception of the human society that due to one reason or the other, abortion and the disbelief, as well as, pain felt by the unborn child, has been, either directly or indirectly, part of our society and the world as whole. Following the above line of thoughts, in this paper, this study shall delineate abortion to mean all cases of artificially induced termination of pregnancy with the implicit or explicit intention of bringing about the death of the foetus and in which case the intention is realized coupled with their effects on the unborn in Nigeria.
This paper therefore, seeks to analyze and prove the very facts that an unborn, being a person, is subjected to dehumanising and torturing acts as they actually feel pain during abortion, while been robbed entirely of their lives.Comprehending it this way will help achieve the objectives of this study coupled with the question of the realization that aborting the unborn child is detrimental, as well as, painful to the child, maybe even more than the mother.
A BRIEF LOOK AT THE WORD ABORTION
Life presents itself as a mystery, even to the possessor. This is because its „where from‟ and „where to‟ even its „why‟ is quite beyond his comprehension. However, philosophical thinking traces life to the ultimate being – „Esse in se‟ or God in the language of religion. Accordingly, a novel perspective arises in which human life is seen as sacred, having a sublime purpose and thus should be judiciously guarded. In the above light, the immanent instinct to preserve life known as the law of self-preservation which is operative in all living things is pre-eminent especially in „human‟ beings.
Sequel to the above analysis, abortion as we shall try to understand it, is one of the most fundamental anti-life preservation devices. Etymologically, it comes from two Latin words “abortus” and “abortive” meaning miscarriage, premature birth or perishing by an untimely birth respectively. Hence, in the widest intention of the word, abortion includes all cases of fetal expulsion from the womb whether inadvertently – miscarriage or spontaneous abortion or induced – abortion on demand.[2]
The right to kill a child (euphemistically called abortion) has been practiced since before written history. Various ancient methods relied upon a number of different herbs to induce menstruation and expel the foetus. Soranus, a child-bearing expert of the second century BC, recommended exercises such as horseback riding and carrying heavy loads, which would make a woman more likely to miscarry. If the pregnancy was not terminated after one treatment, others would be recommended.
However, in its most concise extension, abortion so to speak denotes all cases of induced abortions. It is in this understanding that Fagothey states that: “abortion is the expulsion of a non-viable foetus that is of one too young to live outside the womb”.[3] In the opinion of Callaham, it is the “ending of a pregnancy before the embryo or foetus can live outside the female body.”[4] For Matthews, it is “the termination of pregnancy before independent viability of the foetus develops”.5 These afore stated definitions excluded the natural cases of abortion because to expel or to terminate, lexically speaking, suggest a human subject with an intention to achieve expulsion. It is also only induced abortion that can be of interest to criminal law. Viewed in its right perspective then, abortion is synonymous with “murder” as it interferes with nature in a way that results to the death of a person.
Today, in countries where abortion is legalized, there are several simple and standard medical procedures which end the pregnancy without extensive regimens.It is legal and practised in the U.S., India (as a result of sex discrimination) and a host of other places. In the U.S. for example, Abortion was not illegal until the 1880s, when a number of states passed stringent anti-abortion laws. These laws are often linked to the Comstock Laws of 1873, which made it illegal to distribute materials used for contraception or for abortion. Abortion remained illegal until the controversial but landmark Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade of 1973.[5] This case legalized abortion and has become so till this day.
Nigeria has 36 states and a Federal Capital territory. The 19 states in the Northern part of the country and the FCT are governed by Penal Code while the 17 states in the South are governed by the Criminal code. Abortion in Nigeria is governed by either of the two laws depending on geographical location. Nigeria‟s abortion laws make it one of the most restrictive countries regarding abortion.In Nigeria, termination of the life of the unborn child is highly restricted under both the Penal and Criminal Code and carries heavy penalty for all the parties involved in the act of abortion.[6]
It must be stated though that irrespective of these laws, this illegal act seems to flourish in the society. Professor Okonofua says,
“The abortion rate in Nigeria is 45 per 1000. About 80% of the women we interviewed said they have had an abortion in their lifetime, and that is the highest rate ever in any country in the world.”
About a million births a year in Nigeria are to teenage mothers, according to former minister of health,OlikoyeRansome-Kuti, and abortion complications are responsible for 72% of all deaths among teenagers below the age of 19.8Whatever the reason for operating to induce the destruction of a new life, the crime as already noted has nowhere and at no time been a social habit in Nigeria.
The major objection to the termination of the right of the unborn is that as death is not pleasant to every existing human being so also death is not pleasant to the unborn child. Abortion shows no kindness to the unborn child. The various methods of abortion used are harmful to the unborn. Thus, the importance of this paper cannot be over emphasized. Some countries believe that the unborn is not a person until delivery while others believe that rights start accruing to people at the moment of conception. Some feel and believe that the unborn feels no pain when aborted and as such, removing them totally from the womb of their mother does them no harm. The belief is also that by regulating the right of the unborn to the background and denying them the filial rights enjoyed by children, the society will be able to purge themselves of their existence which is usually not so.
FETAL PAIN
Scientific evidence suggests abortion is excruciatingly painful for the unborn child. An unborn child, at 20 weeks gestation, is fully capable of experiencing pain. Without question, abortion is a dreadfully painful experience for any infant subjected to such a surgical procedure.[7]While an unborn child cannot verbally express the pain she experiences, all biological indicators suggest unborn children are capable of feeling pain by at least 20 weeks. Steven Calvin states that “The neural pathways are present for pain to be experienced quite early by unborn babies.”[8]Dr. Paul Ranallialso states that:
“At 20 weeks, the fetal brain has the full complement of brain cells present in adulthood, ready and waiting to receive pain signals from the body, and their electrical activity can be recorded by standard electroencephalography (EEG)”[9]
Between weeks 20 and 30, an unborn child has more pain receptors per square inch than at any other time, before or after birth, with only a very thin layer of skin for protection. Mechanisms that inhibit or moderate the experience of pain do not begin to develop until weeks 30-32. Any pain the unborn child experiences before these mechanisms form is likely worse than the pain an older child or adult experiences. The unborn child‟s experience of pain may actually be heightened. In order to understand this better, we shall go through the different stages of the development of an unborn child in utero, by this, I hope to establish that an unborn child indeed do feel pain especially when the mother undergoes the procedure of abortion. These stages are stated and explained as follows:
18 Days: Brain
The brain begins to take shape only 18 days after conception. By 20 days, the brain has already differentiated into forebrain, midbrain, and hind brain, and the spinal cord has started to grow. [10]
5 Weeks: Pain Receptors
Four or five weeks after conception, pain receptors appear around the mouth, followed by nerve fibres, which carry stimuli to the brain. By 18 weeks, pain receptors have appeared throughout the body. Around week 6, the unborn child first responds to touch. 13
6 Weeks: Cortex
In weeks 6-18, the cerebral cortex develops. By 18 weeks the cortex has a full complement of neurons. In adults, the cortex has been recognized as the centre of pain consciousness. [11]
8 Weeks: Thalamus
During weeks 8-16, the thalamus develops, functioning as the main relay centre in the brain for sensory impulses going from the spinal cord to the cortex.[12]
14-18 Weeks: Nerve Tracts
In week 18, nerve tracts connecting the spinal cord and the thalamus are established, and nerves from the thalamus first contact the cortex in week 20. Nerve fibres not routed through the thalamus have already reached the cortex by 14 weeks.[13]
18 Weeks: Stress Hormones
As early as 18 weeks, stress hormones are released by an unborn child injected by a needle, just as they are when adults feel pain. Hormone levels in those babies decrease as painrelievers are supplied.[14]
Before 18 Weeks
Even before nerve tracts are fully established, the unborn child may feel pain; studies show anencephalic infants, whose cortex is severely reduced if not altogether missing, may experience pain as long as other neurological structures are functioning. [15]
20 Weeks: All Parts in Place
With pain receptors, spinal cord, nerve tracts, thalamus, and cortex in place, all anatomical links needed for pain transmission to the brain, for feeling pain, are present.
In some jurisdictions, an unborn child has less legal protection from feeling pain than commercial livestock. In a slaughterhouse, a method of slaughter is deemed legally humane only if “all animals are rendered insensible to pain by a single blow or gunshot or an electrical, chemical, or other means that is rapid and effective, before being shackled, hoisted, thrown, cast, or cut.” [16]
By contrast, D&E abortions, performed as late as 24 weeks (well after the child begins to feel pain), involve the dismemberment of the unborn child by a pair of sharp metal forceps.[17]Instillation methods of abortion (performed even in the third trimester) involve the replacement of up to one cup of amniotic fluid with a concentrated salt solution, which the unborn child inhales as the salt burns her skin. The child lives in this condition for up to an hour. In neither of these techniques is the unborn child provided with any form of anaesthesia. [18]
Maternal anaesthesia offers little pain protection for the unborn child. For maternal anaesthesia to provide adequate pain protection for the unborn child, it would have to avoid metabolism by the mother‟s liver, enter her bloodstream, cross the placental membrane, reach the unborn child‟s circulation system in sufficient concentration, and cross the child‟s blood/brain barrier. The dose of anaesthesia necessary to pass all five steps would endanger the mother. [19]Only anaesthesia administered directly to the fetus can sufficiently curb the pain caused by surgery or abortion. In fact, a London Telegraph survey found that 80% of British neuroscientists responding favoured the use of fetal anaesthesia for abortions conducted between weeks 11-24. [20]
The public supports the dissemination of information on fetal pain. An April 15-17, 2004, Zogby poll of more than 1,200 people found 77% saying that they favoured laws requiring that women who are 20 weeks or more along in their pregnancies be given information about fetal pain before having an abortion. Abortionists callously ignore the suffering of the unborn. In a lawsuit seeking an injunction on the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, abortionist Dr Timothy Johnson was questioned on fetal pain:
“Does the fetus feel pain?” Judge Richard C. Casey asked Johnson, saying he had been told that studies of a type of abortion usually performed in the second trimester had concluded they do. Johnson said he did not know, adding that he knew of no scientific research on the subject. The judge then pressed Johnson on whether he ever thought about fetal pain while he performs the abortion procedure that involves dismemberment. Another doctor a day earlier had testified that a fetus sometimes does not immediately die after limbs are pulled off. “I guess whenever I…” Johnson began before the judge interrupted. “Simple question, doctor. Does it ever cross your mind?” Casey pressed. Johnson said it did not. “Never crossed your mind?” the judge asked again. “No,” Johnson answered. [21]
The unborn child is sentient during pregnancy. If we presume for a moment then, that the nature of pain, rather than foetal development, is decisive, how ought we to define „pain‟? Derbyshire suggests that there has been a recent shift in the way we understand pain:
“Pain is no longer regarded as merely a physical sensation of noxious stimulus and disease, but is seen as a conscious experience which may be modulated by mental, emotional and sensory mechanisms and includes both sensory and emotional components. Pain has been described as a multidimensional phenomena for some time and this understanding is reflected in the current IASP (International Association for the Study of Pain) definition of pain as „an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage, or described in terms of such damage”.[22]
He goes on to express his opinion that the onset of pain is not a sudden experience, but rather that our capacity to experience pain „is gradually formed as a consequence of general conscious development. Thus pain requires the support of a sophisticated neurological and cognitive architecture.‟[23] This leads him to refute Burgess‟s and Tawia‟s identification of the cortex as the „seat of pain‟ in the body:
“In summary, the conscious appreciation of pain cannot be explained as the consequence of an active “pain centre”. Instead a “neuromatrix”…is proposed as necessary for the experience of pain. Parallel interacting areas…each of which add a component to the experience of pain but none of which define it in its entirety…”[24]
The upshot of all of this for the unborn child obviously depends upon when Derbyshire regards such a „neuromatrix‟ as being in place. One influential argument maintains that it is the emergence of actual consciousness and sentience (and not merely their pre-conditions) that marks the dividing line between beings with personhood status and those without. Only a being that is conscious and capable of experiencing pleasure and pain can be said to have interests – in pleasure and the avoidance of pain, for example – and may on that basis be accorded rights to protect those interests.[25]
Science does not yet permit an exact identification of the point at which consciousness and sentience is manifested in human beings. Many neurophysiologists believe that the normal human unborn child begins to possess a rudimentary capacity for sentience at some stage in the second trimester of pregnancy.[26] It is widely believed that prior to that stage the unborn child manifests only unconscious reflexes and not the behaviours and responses suggestive of sentience. There are important implications of the sentience criterion for the question of the moral permissibility of TOPs. On the one hand, TOP at an early stage of fetal development presents no serious moral problem in terms of the impact upon the unborn child itself.
According to this view, an early term unborn child is not a being with an interest in its own continued life. If left to develop normally, it will develop into a sentient being and therefore a morally significant being, one with an interest in continued life and perhaps a right to life. However, until it has become sentient it does not have such an interest, and cannot therefore have such a right either. Late term TOPs, on the other hand, do pose a moral problem according to the sentience account. However, it is important to note that the sentience criterion does not entail that late stage TOP is morally impermissible.
CONCLUSION
I have tried to show that fetal pain is real during the process of aborting the unborn child. This paper therefore, has been able to establish the glaring but yet debatable fact that since the unborn child feels pain, sparing such a child of such devastating and painful experience is only humane and rightfully deserved by such a child. Most times, we are unaware of the pain our actions cost others while on the other hand, in most cases where we are aware, we bluntly refuse to acknowledge such a fact simply because it does not favour us in the long run.
This paper, therefore, I hope has been able to sensitize the people on the fact that the advocacy against abortion bothers not on the selfishness or lack of empathy on the part of the advocate, as it may seem, but on the ardent zealof the advocate to fight against the execution of an innocent live due to various reasons amongst which is that fetal pain is entirely, as evidenced above, a reality and definitely not a farce.
[1] Quotes of an anonymous from the “Dairy of an unborn child”
[2] Roe v. Wade(supra), 93 S.Ct. 705. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services109 S.Ct. 3040, 106 L. Ed. 2d 410.
[3] A. Fagothey, „Right and Reason‟ (Collumbus, c.u.Moshby Co., 1959), p. 241.
[4] D. Callaham, „Abortion‟ (World Book EncyclopediaChicago, Child-craft International inc., 1979), p. 149 5 H.M. Leonard, „Abortion‟ (EncyclopediaBritanicaNew York: William Benton Pub., 1972), p. 42.
[5] Christina Raup, „Abortion‟, (The Embryo Project Encyclopedia), 2010
[6] Okagbue I., „Pregnancy termination and the law in Nigeria‟, (Studies in family planning, 1999). Pg 197 8Abiodun Raufu, „Unsafe abortions cause 20 000 deaths a year in Nigeria‟, 2002.
[7] Robert J. White, MD., Ph.D. professor of neurosurgery, Case Western Reserve University
[8] Steven Calvin, Perinatologist, University of Minnesota
[9] Dr. Paul Ranalli, neurologist, University of Toronto
[10] Blackburn, S.T., „Maternal, Fetal, and Neonatal Physiology‟. 2nd ed (2003). 13Ibid 573.
[11] Vanhatalo, S &Nieuwenhuizen, O. “FetalPain?”Brain and Development. 22 (2000)
[12] ibid
[13] “Expert Report of K. S. Anand.” Northern District of the US District Court in California, 2004.
[14] Garg, A &Rovnaghi, C. “Fetal Response to Intra-Uterine Needling: Is It Pain? Does It Matter? Paediatric Research. V 51, No 1, 2002.
[15] Van Assche, FA. “Anencephalic as Organ Donors.”Am J Obstet Gyn 163 (1990)
[16] Section 2 of the Humane Slaughter Act, 7 USC 1902
[17] Hern, W. Abortion Practice Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1984.
[18] Kerenyi, T. “Intraamniotic techniques.”Abortion and Sterilization. ed. Hodgson, 1981, Galen, RS and
Chauhan, P et al. “Fetal pathology and mechanism of fetal death …” Am J Obst Gyn 120 (1974), Lyon, J.
“Abortion Paradox: A Live Baby.” York Daily Record. 21 Aug 1982, Corson, S, et al. Fertility Control, 1985.
[19] Sheridan, M & Highfield, R. “Growing Pains.”London Telegraph. 12 Oct 2000.
[20] ibid
[21] Neumeister, L. “Judge Asks Doctor If Fetus Can Feel Pain,” Associated Press, 1 Apr 2004. Where an author measured fetal development by gestational age, all numbers have been converted to fetal age. 9/04
[22] Derbyshire G.W.S, „Locating The Beginnings of Pain‟ (Bioethics 1999) 13(1) 1
[23] Ibid. at 5
[24] Ibid. at 15
[25] Feinberg, J. „The Problem of Abortion‟. (Belmont, CA.: Wadsworth, 1984), Singer, P. and Kuhse, H. „The
Ethics of Embryo Research‟. Law, Medicine and Health Care, 14 (1986): 133-8 and Steinbock, B. „Life Before Birth: The Moral and Legal Status of Embryos and Fetuses‟(New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992).
[26] Mary Anne Warren, „Abortion‟, in Peter Singer (ed) 1993, A Companion to Ethics, (Cambridge, MA: Blackwell): pp. 308-9.
NIALS' Compendia Series: Your One-Stop Solution For Navigating Nigerian Laws (2004-2023)
Email: info@nials.edu.ng, tugomak@yahoo.co.uk, Contact: For Inquiry and information, kindly contact, NIALS Director of Marketing: +2348074128732, +2348100363602.
