More from our inbox:
- Veterans as Poll Workers
- An Immigrant’s Story
- Political Messages: Time to Turn Up the Sound
Credit…Allison Dinner/EPA, via Shutterstock
To the Editor:
Re “November’s Second-Most-Important Election,” by David French (column, Oct. 14): I find it perplexing that discussions surrounding abortion often hinge on the heart as a symbol of life, when it is, in fact, the brain that defines our humanity. Neurological research indicates that the brain undergoes significant development until the end of the second trimester—around 24 weeks of gestation—when viability is generally recognized. This development continues well into the third trimester, and crucial areas such as the frontal cortex are not fully matured until individuals reach their mid-20s. It is imperative that lawmakers and society at large engage with the scientific understanding of neurology, rather than be swayed by emotional responses.
Ellen Creane
Guilford, Conn.
To the Editor:
I find myself grappling with the complexities of the abortion debate and feel a deep internal conflict. However, one point that troubles me regarding the pro-life stance is the lack of discussion about the support required after a baby is born. Once a child enters the world, they require essentials such as diapers, nutritious food, quality childcare, and access to good schools. Furthermore, support for higher education or vocational training is crucial, as is the need for safe environments in which to grow and learn. If there are no concrete plans to address child poverty, enhance public education, or establish effective gun control measures, can we genuinely claim to be proponents of children’s well-being? To conclude the conversation (and legislation) at childbirth alone does not reflect a true commitment to life, but rather an emphasis on merely bringing children into the world.
Margaret Dowling
Philadelphia
