Should paying women for aborted fetal tissue be legalized?

In the spirit of recent threads, such as the legalization of surrogacy, prostitution, sale of one's own bodily organs, I thought I would post a poll that would hopefully be as thought provoking as it might be stomach churning.

Presently, under Federal law, it is illegal in the United States to sell fetal tissue. That is, it is a crime to sell the body parts of stillborn or aborted fetuses. Presently, the bodies of these unborn children (whether zygotes all the way up to fully-developed fetuses) cannot enter the commercial stream, and the women who abort them cannot benefit from the sale of their expectorated fetuses' tissue.

My question is this: Why should this law remain on the books? Why should research companies remain barred from paying women or perhaps abortion clinics for such tissue in order to keep those clinics in operation? Why shouldn't the women who had abortions not be able to benefit from the sale of their fetuses' bodily tissue? Why shouldn't medical research companies not be able to pay women for having abortions, so that they can use that fetal tissue in medical research? Perhaps pay them to have abortions at various stages of pregnancy in order to have a wider range of fetal tissue to research? Maybe advertising to pregnant mothers that they can make good money for aborting their unborn children and selling their body parts to medical research firms if the rigors and costs of pregnancy are too high to bear?

What argument, if any, from either the pro-choice or pro-life or non-aligned members here is there to keep these laws on the books? Why shouldn't women who wish to have abortions, many of whom are apparently impoverished, not be given the chance to recoup financially?

Same reason law enforcement must never migrate to a private sector profit model.
It creates distasteful and unwelcome distortions, both socially and financially.
Same reason health care itself should not heavily leverage itself toward the profit motive, it creates distasteful and unwelcome distortions, both socially and financially.
Same reason the corrections business should not be profit oriented either. Again, it creates distasteful and unwelcome distortions, both socially and financially.

There's just some things that should never be tied to a profit motive, and the reasons are probably self-evident to many.
There is no solution to "keep research facilities or clinics in operation" that can adequately justify transforming the use of fetal tissue into a money stream.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

Same reason law enforcement must never migrate to a private sector profit model.
It creates distasteful and unwelcome distortions, both socially and financially.
Same reason health care itself should not heavily leverage itself toward the profit motive, it creates distasteful and unwelcome distortions, both socially and financially.
Same reason the corrections business should not be profit oriented either. Again, it creates distasteful and unwelcome distortions, both socially and financially.

There's just some things that should never be tied to a profit motive, and the reasons are probably self-evident to many.
There is no solution to "keep research facilities or clinics in operation" that can adequately justify transforming the use of fetal tissue into a money stream.

Click to expand...

The reasons are certainly self-evident to me, Checkerboard Strangler. But other than simply being stomach churning and, in my view, utterly immoral and exploitative, how would you argue against someone who does not believe any form of morality should play a role in the law, and the only thing that matters is consent and those who are able to give it? That as long as someone is consenting to giving some kind of good or service of their own body, that is all that matters?

Felis Leo said:

In the spirit of recent threads, such as the legalization of surrogacy, prostitution, sale of one's own bodily organs, I thought I would post a poll that would hopefully be as thought provoking as it might be stomach churning.

Presently, under Federal law, it is illegal in the United States to sell fetal tissue. That is, it is a crime to sell the body parts of stillborn or aborted fetuses. Presently, the bodies of these unborn children (whether zygotes all the way up to fully-developed fetuses) cannot enter the commercial stream, and the women who abort them cannot benefit from the sale of their expectorated fetuses' tissue.

My question is this: Why should this law remain on the books? Why should research companies remain barred from paying women or perhaps abortion clinics for such tissue in order to keep those clinics in operation? Why shouldn't the women who had abortions not be able to benefit from the sale of their fetuses' bodily tissue? Why shouldn't medical research companies not be able to pay women for having abortions, so that they can use that fetal tissue in medical research? Perhaps pay them to have abortions at various stages of pregnancy in order to have a wider range of fetal tissue to research? Maybe advertising to pregnant mothers that they can make good money for aborting their unborn children and selling their body parts to medical research firms if the rigors and costs of pregnancy are too high to bear?

What argument, if any, from either the pro-choice or pro-life or non-aligned members here is there to keep these laws on the books? Why shouldn't women who wish to have abortions, many of whom are apparently impoverished, not be given the chance to recoup financially?

Click to expand...

The main reason is we don't need create an environment where women purposely get pregnant and have abortions as a means of making money.

Felis Leo said:

The reasons are certainly self-evident to me, Checkerboard Strangler. But other than simply being stomach churning and, in my view, utterly immoral and exploitative, how would you argue against someone who does not believe any form of morality should play a role in the law, and the only thing that matters is consent and those who are able to give it? That as long as someone is consenting to giving some kind of good or service of their own body, that is all that matters?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't.
I'd just make sure that I did the best I could to see to it that they can't legally do it, that's all.
If there are enough who think like I do, and our lawmakers can be convinced, then it won't be legal to do it.
If we do not have the numbers, then it might become legal, and that would be a tragedy.
Our track record isn't that impressive, however, what with private corrections already one of the fastest growing industries in America today and Erik Prince making enormous strides in selling the notion of a fully privatized war in Afghanistan.
Privatized law enforcement can't be very far behind.

Parents can already decide to donate their children's organs and tissue.

They are not paid for that. My question would be...would $$ change the parent's decisions regarding their child's medical care?

Whatever your answer...then why would it matter any differently for the unborn?

Felis Leo said:

In the spirit of recent threads, such as the legalization of surrogacy, prostitution, sale of one's own bodily organs, I thought I would post a poll that would hopefully be as thought provoking as it might be stomach churning.

Presently, under Federal law, it is illegal in the United States to sell fetal tissue. That is, it is a crime to sell the body parts of stillborn or aborted fetuses. Presently, the bodies of these unborn children (whether zygotes all the way up to fully-developed fetuses) cannot enter the commercial stream, and the women who abort them cannot benefit from the sale of their expectorated fetuses' tissue.

My question is this: Why should this law remain on the books? Why should research companies remain barred from paying women or perhaps abortion clinics for such tissue in order to keep those clinics in operation? Why shouldn't the women who had abortions not be able to benefit from the sale of their fetuses' bodily tissue? Why shouldn't medical research companies not be able to pay women for having abortions, so that they can use that fetal tissue in medical research? Perhaps pay them to have abortions at various stages of pregnancy in order to have a wider range of fetal tissue to research? Maybe advertising to pregnant mothers that they can make good money for aborting their unborn children and selling their body parts to medical research firms if the rigors and costs of pregnancy are too high to bear?

What argument, if any, from either the pro-choice or pro-life or non-aligned members here is there to keep these laws on the books? Why shouldn't women who wish to have abortions, many of whom are apparently impoverished, not be given the chance to recoup financially?

Click to expand...

Why are anti-choicers so eager to lie? This has never been a thing and will never be a thing. Only shipping and handling costs of the cells are paid for.

Felis Leo said:

In the spirit of recent threads, such as the legalization of surrogacy, prostitution, sale of one's own bodily organs, I thought I would post a poll that would hopefully be as thought provoking as it might be stomach churning.

Presently, under Federal law, it is illegal in the United States to sell fetal tissue. That is, it is a crime to sell the body parts of stillborn or aborted fetuses. Presently, the bodies of these unborn children (whether zygotes all the way up to fully-developed fetuses) cannot enter the commercial stream, and the women who abort them cannot benefit from the sale of their expectorated fetuses' tissue.

My question is this: Why should this law remain on the books? Why should research companies remain barred from paying women or perhaps abortion clinics for such tissue in order to keep those clinics in operation? Why shouldn't the women who had abortions not be able to benefit from the sale of their fetuses' bodily tissue? Why shouldn't medical research companies not be able to pay women for having abortions, so that they can use that fetal tissue in medical research? Perhaps pay them to have abortions at various stages of pregnancy in order to have a wider range of fetal tissue to research? Maybe advertising to pregnant mothers that they can make good money for aborting their unborn children and selling their body parts to medical research firms if the rigors and costs of pregnancy are too high to bear?

What argument, if any, from either the pro-choice or pro-life or non-aligned members here is there to keep these laws on the books? Why shouldn't women who wish to have abortions, many of whom are apparently impoverished, not be given the chance to recoup financially?

Click to expand...

Why just women? Lets include men in this discussion. Shouldnt the male also be compensated?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Felis Leo said:

The reasons are certainly self-evident to me, Checkerboard Strangler. But other than simply being stomach churning and, in my view, utterly immoral and exploitative, how would you argue against someone who does not believe any form of morality should play a role in the law, and the only thing that matters is consent and those who are able to give it? That as long as someone is consenting to giving some kind of good or service of their own body, that is all that matters?

Click to expand...

Its a very distasteful thing to consider but its a great question. No less distasteful than abortion. Its her body, her choice, its none of your buisiness if she wants to profit from it, it should be the lefts position if they are consistent in thier principles.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Phys251 said:

Why are anti-choicers so eager to lie? This has never been a thing and will never be a thing. Only shipping and handling costs of the cells are paid for.

Click to expand...

First, I am pro-choice, Phys251. Second, if you are referring to me, what have a I lied about, Phys251? I am asking whether it should be legalized. And it is clear that some people here think it should be legalized. Do you think the law should remain on the books, or should the sale of fetal tissue be decriminalized? And if so, why? If not, why not?

Felis Leo said:

First, I am pro-choice, Phys251. Second, if you are referring to me, what have a I lied about, Phys251? I am asking whether it should be legalized. And it is clear that some people here think it should be legalized. Do you think the law should remain on the books, or should the sale of fetal tissue be decriminalized? And if so, why? If not, why not?

Click to expand...

For the record, are you pro-choice for elective abortion?

In the spirit of scientific advancement for the betterment of mankind, certainly. Not to forget an excellent source of protein. Long pork as tender as veal. Yum.

Felis Leo said:

First, I am pro-choice, Phys251. Second, if you are referring to me, what have a I lied about, Phys251? I am asking whether it should be legalized. And it is clear that some people here think it should be legalized. Do you think the law should remain on the books, or should the sale of fetal tissue be decriminalized? And if so, why? If not, why not?

Click to expand...

My apologies, I misread your OP.

I agree, there's no reason to forbid using aborted fetal tissue in medical research, so long as the woman is donating that tissue 100% voluntarily.

My only concern with putting a financial incentive on this is that it could create a situation similar to that of plasma donation, which can be hell on the body and doesn't really pay that well.

The tissue would be otherwise thrown out, and the payment has nothing to do with the tissue being collected. Women aren't directly paid to have an abortion to provide fetal tissue for research. it would have been done anyway. That tissue is useful for research that can save many lives, so its dumb to throw away

Now, if you were to offer money to women to have an abortion and donate their tissue, that would be horrible as it would incentivize them to get pregnant and have abortion to make money. THe same as its unethical to get money for organ donation, it exploits desperate people

Lursa said:

For the record, are you pro-choice for elective abortion?

Click to expand...

If by elective abortion, Lursa, you mean for reasons beyond the health of the mother or cases of rape and incest, yes. I believe a woman has the right to seek an abortion for any reason or even no reason whatsoever. The right is absolute. However, I am not against laws that curtail it past a certain point, such as past the point of definite fetal viability. And if you were about to follow up with a question regarding "fetal heartbeat" bills, no, I am not for those. I am talking about definite fetal viability, typically at the 6-month mark.

Additionally, as you may have divined, this does not mean I give my moral imprimatur to those women who seek abortions for reasons beyond health and rape. In the same way that I am a free speech absolutist, and believe the expression of one's thoughts and opinions cannot and should not be restricted by the government. While I support all people's free speech rights, that does not mean I have to like the thoughts and opinions of National Socialists, or Communists, or Islamists, for example. Not that I am comparing women who abort babies to terrorist enablers and sympathizers, but the analogy illustrating the principle stands.

trouble13 said:

Why just women? Lets include men in this discussion. Shouldnt the male also be compensated?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

As we all know, liberal women reproduce asexually.

Felis Leo said:

If by elective abortion, Lursa, you mean for reasons beyond the health of the mother or cases of rape and incest, yes. I believe a woman has the right to seek an abortion for any reason or even no reason whatsoever. The right is absolute.

Click to expand...

Thank you

What's the point, exactly?

Felis Leo said:

First, I am pro-choice, Phys251. Second, if you are referring to me, what have a I lied about, Phys251? I am asking whether it should be legalized. And it is clear that some people here think it should be legalized. Do you think the law should remain on the books, or should the sale of fetal tissue be decriminalized? And if so, why? If not, why not?

Click to expand...

Roe v. Wade was an attempt to balance the legal rights & responsibilities of the pregnant woman, her doctor(s), & the state. Under Roe, the state could begin to control access to abortion in the 2nd trimester, & forbid abortion outright in the 3rd (except for the life or health of the woman).

I don't see any such consideration for the state's interest in the idea of allowing the sale of fetal tissue directly by the woman. & from a pragmatic POV, wouldn't she have to be cleared medically as a source of fetal tissue? So there's a basic biological/medical checkup, licensing or certification for that. Then licensing as a medical supplier - she'd have to form some kind of corporation, register with her state - does she charge/collect sales tax? She'd need a lawyer, accountant, probably have to watch what she ate & drank - record any drugs, dosages, etc. Drink alcohol in moderation.

It's a very long list - the notion is interesting, but tossing a newbie into a medical supply chain & marketplace? It's a non-starter, I think. Much more likely would be some kind of middleman outfit that links up sellers & potential buyers - but that's de facto what already exists. So why reinvent the wheel, if there's no discernable improvement in outcomes @ the end of all that?

Asked another way: What are the projected benefits to allowing women to directly sell their aborted fetal tissue, over the system that already exists in the US? (& bear in mind that several states - TX? IN? are already requiring that aborted fetal tissue be buried or otherwise treated just as if it were an adult cadaver. There would have to be some overriding language in any state laws allowing direct sale of aborted fetal tissue by the formerly pregnant woman, & likely also @ the federal level.)

Felis Leo said:

In the spirit of recent threads, such as the legalization of surrogacy, prostitution, sale of one's own bodily organs, I thought I would post a poll that would hopefully be as thought provoking as it might be stomach churning.

Presently, under Federal law, it is illegal in the United States to sell fetal tissue. That is, it is a crime to sell the body parts of stillborn or aborted fetuses. Presently, the bodies of these unborn children (whether zygotes all the way up to fully-developed fetuses) cannot enter the commercial stream, and the women who abort them cannot benefit from the sale of their expectorated fetuses' tissue.

My question is this: Why should this law remain on the books? Why should research companies remain barred from paying women or perhaps abortion clinics for such tissue in order to keep those clinics in operation? Why shouldn't the women who had abortions not be able to benefit from the sale of their fetuses' bodily tissue? Why shouldn't medical research companies not be able to pay women for having abortions, so that they can use that fetal tissue in medical research? Perhaps pay them to have abortions at various stages of pregnancy in order to have a wider range of fetal tissue to research? Maybe advertising to pregnant mothers that they can make good money for aborting their unborn children and selling their body parts to medical research firms if the rigors and costs of pregnancy are too high to bear?

What argument, if any, from either the pro-choice or pro-life or non-aligned members here is there to keep these laws on the books? Why shouldn't women who wish to have abortions, many of whom are apparently impoverished, not be given the chance to recoup financially?

Click to expand...

I voted yes. If your going to kill babies, why not go all the way. At least that's intellectually honest. Kill 'em and make a buck off them. The American way. You make 'em we scrape 'em.... no fetus can beat us.... but be careful what you wish for; de-valuing life has a way of spreading. Maybe we should kill off old people when they're no longer productive?

It's not like they're harvesting organs. Stem cells is all I can think of, but modern medical biology is above my pay grade.

No bucks for the factory, nor the clinic. When you give it up; that's what that means.