LETTER : The human `whole' begins at fertilisation

Dr Helen Watt
Sunday 23 April 1995 23:02 BST
Comments

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.

From Dr Helen Watt

Sir: Dr John Habgood is mistaken in believing ("The meaning of life - and death", 20 April) that respect for human embryos - or for persistent vegetative state patients - is scientifically misplaced.

A human being is a human "whole" or organism, not some purely spiritual entity. Indeed, the human soul has traditionally been identified not as something added to the living human organism, but as its "principle of life". The human "whole" begins at fertilisation, except for the rare case of twinning by asexual reproduction. A PVS patient is a human being - a living, self-organising whole - although a human being who has been badly damaged in his or her mental capacities. In the same way, an anencephalic newborn - also kept alive by virtue of the brain stem - is a very sick baby, not simply a source of organs for other patients.

The living human being is always either present or absent. Some human beings are very young, unfamiliar in appearance, or profoundly mentally handicapped. Where there is any doubt as to whether a living human being is present (or still present) the Pope is quite correct in stating that a reasonable margin must be left for error.

Yours sincerely,

HELEN WATT

Research Fellow

The Linacre Centre

London, NW8

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in