Letter: Parliament must rule on birth ethics
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Heather Lawrence asks "Can it really be suggested that the rights of a foetus are greater than those of a child with a life threatening but curable medical complaint?" (Letters, 21 February). Talking of "rights" confuses the issue of whether the mother of a foetus which is about to be born and which is capable of living an independent existence owes a duty (whether to the foetus or society) which is proper justification for allowing doctors to perform a Caesarean operation without her consent, as in the Ms S case.
Whether or not such a duty is recognised is a matter for the courts but whether or not it should exist is a matter for Parliament. Undoubtedly very serious ethical issues are involved and judges should not be placed in the position of having to resolve them. Nine years ago Lord Justice Balcombe said: "It is intolerable to place a judge in the position of having to make such a decision without any guidance as to the principles upon which his decision should based. If the law is to be extended ... so as to impose control over the mother of an unborn child, then, under our system of parliamentary democracy, it is for Parliament to decide whether such control can be imposed and if so, under what limitations or conditions."
JOHN MITCHELL
Family Law Chambers,
Temple
London EC4
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments