November
8, 2008
The Facts of
When Human Life Begins
Interview With Maureen Condic of the Westchester Institute
By Karna Swanson
SALT LAKE CITY, Utah, NOV. 7, 2008 (Zenit.org).- The conclusion of
scientist Maureen Condic that human life begins at a defined moment
of conception isn't an opinion based on a belief, but rather a
"reflection of the way the world is."
Condic, a senior fellow of the Westchester Institute for Ethics and
the Human Person, published her conclusions in a white paper titled
"When Does Human Life Begin?" In the report she addresses the topic
using current scientific data in human embryology.
An associate professor of neurobiology and anatomy at the University
of Utah School of Medicine, Condic received her doctorate in
neurobiology from the University of California, Berkely. Her
teaching focuses primarily on embryonic development, and she directs
the University of Utah School of Medicine's course in human
embryology.
In the interview with ZENIT, Condic explains why the question of
when human life begins is important to address, and what scientific
criteria she used to define a "moment of conception."
Q: This is the first white paper for the Westchester Institute. Why
this topic? Why now?
Condic: This is an important question, with significant biological,
ethical and philosophical dimensions. As I note in the paper,
resolving when human life begins has important implications for a
number of controversial political topics, including abortion and
human embryonic stem cell research.
As a scientist and as director of a medical school course in human
embryology, I have been considering the general question of when
human life begins for quite a few years. The argument put forward in
the white paper has grown out of discussions with philosophers,
scientists and ethicists, as well as out of my own research in this
area.
Yet this topic has come to the fore in the lead-up to the
presidential election. While the topic of when life begins has
generally been avoided by politicians and government officials,
recently a number of prominent figures have offered their
interpretations, making this a timely subject to consider with
scientific rigor and neutrality.
Q: You define the moment of conception as the second it takes for
the sperm and egg to fuse and form a zygote. What were the
scientific principles you used to arrive at this conclusion?
Condic: The central question of "when does human life begin" can be
stated in a somewhat different way: When do sperm and egg cease to
be, and what kind of thing takes their place once they cease to be?
To address this question scientifically, we need to rely on sound
scientific argument and on the factual evidence. Scientists make
distinctions between different cell types (for example, sperm, egg
and the cell they produce at fertilization) based on two simple
criteria: Cells are known to be different because they are made of
different components and because they behave in distinct ways.
These two criteria are used throughout the scientific enterprise to
distinguish one cell type from another, and they are the basis of
all scientific (as opposed to arbitrary, faith-based or political)
distinctions. I have applied these two criteria to the scientific
data concerning fertilization, and they are the basis for the
conclusion that a new human organism comes into existence at the
moment of sperm-egg fusion.
Q: Many in the scientific world would say that fertilization doesn't
happen in a moment, but rather that it is a process that comes to an
end at the end of the first cell cycle, which is 24 hours later. Why
is it important to define a "moment of conception," as opposed to a
"process of fertilization"?
Condic: It is not important to somehow define a "moment" or a
"process" of fertilization in the abstract. It is important to base
conclusions and judgments about human embryos on sound scientific
reasoning and on the best available scientific evidence.
Had this analysis led to a different conclusion -- for example, that
fertilization is a "process" -- I would have accepted this
conclusion as scientifically valid. However, a scientific analysis
of the best available data does not support the conclusion that
fertilization is a "process"; it supports the conclusion that
fertilization is an event that takes less than a second to complete.
The events of the first 24 hours following sperm-egg fusion are
clearly unique, but they are also clearly acts of a human organism,
not acts of a mere human cell.
Q: Do opinion, belief and politics have a place in defining the
beginning of a new life? How is it that the topic has become an
issue of debate?
Condic: The topic of when human life begins is an issue of debate
because it has strong implications for public policy on matters that
concern many people; abortion, in-vitro fertilization and human
embryo research. How "opinion, belief and politics" have assumed
such a large role in deciding when life begins is a question for a
sociologist or a psychologist, not a biologist!
It is important to appreciate that the scientific facts are
themselves entirely neutral; they are simply a reflection of the way
the world is, as opposed to how we may wish or imagine it to be.
That is not to say that the scientific facts lend equal support to
any and all views of when human life begins. While people are free
to formulate their opinion on when human life begins in any manner
they choose (including belief and politics), not all opinions are
equally consistent with factual reality. Those who choose to ignore
the facts cannot expect their opinions to garner as much respect or
to be given as much credibility as those who base their opinions in
sound scientific observation and analysis.
The opinions of members of the flat-Earth society should not carry
as much weight as those of astrophysicists in formulating national
aerospace policy. The opinions of those who reject the scientific
evidence concerning when life begins should not be the basis of
public policy on embryo-related topics, either.
Q: Who needs to read this paper and why?
Condic: I think every person who is concerned about the important
"life-issues" of health care, abortion, assisted reproduction and
stem-cell research should read this article, because understanding
when life begins is the basis of a sound political, ethical and
moral debate on these complex and difficult topics. Certainly, all
those charged with the formation of public policy on these matters
should read this argument and think seriously about its
implications. If we cannot know what a human embryo is and when it
comes into existence, we cannot make sound judgments regarding any
of the issues surrounding the human embryo.
Q: What reactions have you received to the conclusions of your
paper? What do you hope will result from its publication?
Condic: Thus far, reactions have been thoughtful and considered. I
hope this will continue and that a clear understanding of the
relevant scientific evidence will help ground future public policy
debates over embryo-related issues in sound scientific fact --
rather than in mere "opinion, belief and politics."
