Posted on 05/26/2002 11:32:37 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
General Electric, which traces its history to 1878 when Thomas Edison established the Edison Electric Light Company, has been responsible for enhancing the quality of human life in many ways.
It adds to that tradition with a new ultrasound device that allows doctors and parents to look inside the womb of a pregnant woman and see the image of a baby in "real-time 4D" rather than the more difficult to read traditional "2D" image.
GE is running a TV commercial that's more exciting to watch than most programs. It shows the face of a woman as she reacts to seeing her baby for the first time. We also see her husband, an unusual twist on TV. If this scene doesn't touch you in the deepest recesses of your heart, the device could determine whether you have a heart. There's also a Web site where the commercial can be viewed (www.gemedicalsystems.com/rad/us/4d/index.html). Over the song, "The First Time Ever I Saw Your Face," an announcer says, "When you see your baby for the first time on the new GE 4D Ultrasound system, it really is a miracle."
A press release from GE touts the medical benefits expected to come from the device because doctors will be able to see the developing child more clearly, enabling them to better diagnose potential problems. But this device may have some unintended consequences in the cultural battle over the meaning and value of human life.
The clarity of the image resembles a high quality photograph. Everyone who sees such a picture will find it extremely difficult to regard the image as anything but that of a baby; not a "fetus," not a "product of conception," not disembodied tissue. The hands move. So does the head. Does the baby's status change because the parents love him or her and want their child to be delivered safely so they can hold in their arms what the mother now holds in her womb? Or does the child inherit an intrinsic right to life separate from what politicians, lawyers, judges and even the woman herself might think?
This, of course, is the great debate. Which side we come down on has implications and applications not only for abortion, but in relation to end-of-life issues and in-between ones, like cloning.
In more than 30 years of speaking to pregnancy help centers, I've met hundreds of women who've had abortions. Virtually all have told me that if they'd seen a picture of their baby, they would have made a different choice. They've also told me that many abortion clinics turn sonogram machines in such a way that the mother is prevented from seeing her baby's image on the screen.
In an age when federal law mandates labels on cans, bottles and cars and truth-in-lending information at banks, why should women be denied information when it comes to a far more important choice about another human life? Few people regret choosing one car over another, or a can of string beans over a can of corn. But many women with whom I've spoken profoundly regret deciding to have an abortion and say their choice would have been different had they seen the person most directly affected by the procedure.
In a press release, GE quotes Michelle Tooms, a patient from Mansfield, Texas, who could see her baby on the GE 4D machine: "On other ultrasound systems, my doctor pointed to my baby's anatomy on the monitor and I couldn't understand what the doctor was trying to explain. With GE's 4D ultrasound, the quality was amazing. I even think I saw the baby smile. The images made me feel close to her." (italics mine).
GE publicity does not suggest the Ultrasound 4D be used in the war against abortion, yet it will be and should be. At $120,000, the machine is expensive, but every pregnancy help center should have one and the law should require every pregnant woman seeking an abortion to view this image of her baby. It might even make her smile and decide to bring another "good thing" to life.
They always have known.
According to the law, it's worse than that.
If your mother (not your parents) wants you dead, you die. Period.
I have the feeling that this "legal" reality is much more destabilizing, psychologically, than we have so far recognized.
It is not a coincidence that legal maneuvers to immunize women from the consequences of their actions (the 'battered woman" defense, in particular) have arisen after 1972. The Father G-d of the Old and New Testament was a Creator who did not allow us to kill each other. The Mother god of Roe v. Wade is Shiva under the mask, and we must be very, very careful not to displease her.
If forced to see images, women will be forced to bear a great emotional burden for having an abortion. Society should be working to make it as easy as possible for a woman to choose to do what she chooses.
GE's product will lead to emotional cruelty against women. If a woman was pregnant because she was raped, for example, the image of her fetus will make her experience the rape all over again.
It's time for those who support women's rights to bring a national boycott against GE. GE is aiding those who want to bring women back to the dark ages.
(Okay, okay, now hold those flames. I don't believe a word of the junk I wrote in the top four paragraphs. I just wanted to give a taste of how leftists are going to argue this one.)
I asked myself "wonder which one of the parents said "the baby looks like me?"...so sweet.
sw
God Bless.
Phew....I was seriously worried.......
yes. it puts a human face on these precious babies... i hope they run these ads again and again and again...
further, i hope ge's product prospers, and 4D photos (animated gifs) are widely distributed.
this is not a subliminal message - it's visceral.
we more clearly see God's miracle that we knew all along - live and in color...
in other words, nope, that isn't just a inconvenient blob of protoplasm, it's a child - here, look.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.