The English language is commonly believed to contain more words than any other. As an English major, I believe word choice is extremely important. Poorly chosen words often isolate opposing sides in a disagreement, especially in this country, where our talent for sugarcoating everything in sight rivals that of Willie Wonka. Discussions turn into arguments when language circumvents the fundamental ideas underlying a particular issue. A prime example is the recent dialogue about the Plan B morning-after pill. Plan B advocates typically discuss contraception in terms of “women’s health” or “women’s reproductive rights.” They identify the woman as the center of the controversy and dismiss their opponents as narrow-minded anti-feminists. Attacking their opponents on those grounds is pointless. Most opponents of emergency contraception seek to meet its advocates on an entirely different playing field. The woman, they reason, is not the focus of this debate. The focus is this essential question: does human life begin with fertilization? Plan B opponents recognize the single-celled organism formed at the moment of fertilization as a human being in its earliest stage of development. Because they believe each human life to be of equal and immeasurable value, they cannot condone the use of a drug that may kill a newly-formed human being. Plan B is marketed as a contraceptive which aims to prevent fertilization before it occurs. The drug does not act exclusively as an abortifacient; it will not dislodge a developing embryo that has attached to the mother’s uterine lining. It can, however, prevent the implantation of a developing embryo. Ah, there’s the rub. If, like LSU Women’s Clinic gynecologist Dr. Philip Hindelang, one defines pregnancy as “a fertilized egg implanted in the female genital tract,” one may claim that Plan B does not end a “pregnancy.” Plan B, Dr. Hindelang explained, may prevent implantation the same way regular birth control does, without the woman realizing it. Additionally, an embryo may fail to implant for unknown reasons in the womb of a woman who wishes to conceive. An embryo failing to implant on its own and intentionally denying it the chance to do so are two different things. Fertilization occurs in the fallopian tube days before the embryo reaches the uterus. It creates a new human being, and Plan B is an abortifacient because it can end the life of this individual. In Biology 1001, most students use a textbook called “The Unity and Diversity of Life.” Page 797 features a chart titled “Stages of Human Development.” The first stage listed is “zygote,” defined as a “single cell resulting from fusion of sperm nucleus and egg nucleus at fertilization.” If the single-celled zygote conceived at fertilization is not a human being, why is it on the chart? Defining pregnancy as “a fertilized egg implanted in the female genital tract” is problematic. The zygote begins to develop immediately, and the resulting embryo may take 5-to-9 days to move from the fallopian tube to the uterus, explained Dr. W.A. Krotoski of the Hippocratic Resource. Bottom line? “A human life begins biologically when the sperm fertilizes the ovum,” said Dr. Krotoski. It is futile for Plan B advocates to argue that the drug will reduce the number of abortions. If fertilization creates a new human person – as biology says it does – then it is just as unethical to destroy it with emergency contraception when it is several days old as it is to destroy it with abortion when it is several weeks or months old. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary says the term embryo applies “from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus.” The 1-day-old unborn person is given the same name as the 8-week-old unborn person. And that’s a medical definition. The claim that the single-celled organism formed at fertilization is not human is hollow and indefensible. If it’s not human, what is it? A group of dividing cells? A ball of tissue? Call it what you will. What I want to know is, why it isn’t human? You entered this world at your conception as a single cell. Your organs, appendages and facial features had not yet developed, but your microscopic body already contained the exact number of chromosomes necessary for your development. Does life begin at fertilization? Yes or no? We may choose to dismiss irrefutable biological evidence and insist human life does not begin with fertilization. We may, like the Nazis, defer to an “order of ethics,” which acknowledges the embryo as human but maintains its life is not worth saving. Or we can face the truth. Fertilization creates a new individual, and intentionally destroying that individual with contraception – emergency or otherwise – is unethical. We cannot change the definition of reality. The truth is inconvenient, but it gives us direction, security and hope. As American novelist and short story author Flannery O’Connor wrote, “The truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.”
—–Contact Emily Byers at [email protected]