<Home> <Ethics> <Topics in Islamic Medicine> <Abortion>

Victims of Abortion

IN THE NAME OF GOD,
THE COMPASSIONATE,
THE MERCIFUL

A B O R T I O N

O' Prophet: When believing women come to you to give you their pledge not to associate anything with God in worship, that they shall not steal, that they shall not commit adultery, that they shall not kill their children, that they shall not utter slander, intentionally forge falsehood, and that they shall not disobey you in any just cause: then accept their pledge and pray to God for their forgiveness, for God is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful".   Holy Quran: 6-12

In the afore mentioned verse of the Quran we have underlined the passage "that they shall not kill their chidren. "In the Arabic text the word children has a connotation meaning both male and female children. During the Jahiliyya era (literally meaning the pre-Islamic period of ignorance), the crime of infanticide was known to be

Modern times, however, have witnessed many winds of change blowing over the old rules. They started cautiously and skillfully but in the span of one generation, led to radical changes of both abortion legislation and the social outlook to abortion.

To start with, there was an expansion of the limits of permitted abortion from life-threatening medical conditions to health threatening ones, then to "possibly" health threatening ones, then the health implications were expanded from physical health to the more subtle area of psychological health and wellbeing.

Fetal indications were also recognized, progressively covering ailments incompatible with life, to those incompatible with normality, to those probably incompatible with normality.

This was further stretched until mere unwantedness of the baby for any reason became, practically, a legitimate excuse for terminating pregnancy.

The abortion "movement" repeat "movement" further exploited the two waves of population explosion on the one hand and women's liberation on the other, and was successful in introducing further acceptable premises for abortion such as socio-economic indications, social indications, abortion as back up for contraceptive failure etc. until the end of the spectrum was reached, viz abortion on demand.

Even under the restrictive type of legislation, abortion was not restricted in the sense expected. There have always been persons in the medical profession or outside it who were prepared to perform abortion clandestinely in return for a varying fee. Some of these abortionists have made huge fortunes out of their illicit traffic. Many of these clandestine operators have, while practising their trade, brought about the death of a number of their patients or exposed them to serious health hazards, such as haemorrhage, cervical tears, perforation of the uterus, infection and other like dangers. Some of the women thus treated have escaped death only to live on with a permanent injury or chronic disease, while others permanently lost fertility. The tragedies resulting from this type of abortion constituted perhaps the strongest arguments of those advocating abortion on demand. Since abortion will take place anyway, they argue, it is far better if performed by licensed physicians, under safe conditions and with full medical care.

Just as the law has been violated by the use of undercover methods, it was violated by 'getting around the law.' For example, under the laws sanctioning abortion on the grounds of a danger to the patient's life or health (physical or psychological), provided that this is recognised as such by two physicians, the problem would be solved by getting two doctors to agree to the need for an operation or the woman shamming a threat to commit suicide if she is not aborted. In the latter case all the psychiatrist has to do" is to write   "suicidal tendencies" on her sheet, a threat to commit suicide being regarded as valid grounds for granting abortion. Evidently, the majority of these abortions would be performed in private clinics rather than in free government hospitals. A strange phenomenon was however, noted. It was believed that legalisation of abortion would do away with the illicit abortion traffic. It appears that this was not the case in those countries where abortion became legal. In Hungary , the number of "illicit" abortions in 1956 -when abortion was declared legal was around 100,000 to 150,000. After legalisation, the figure rose to 160,000 to 180,000 in the sixties, while for 1968 it exceeded 200,000. The same applied to Japan and to other countries, such as the Scandinavian countries.

It is significant that some of the countries that have sanctioned abortion in order to ease the pressure of the population explosion by reducing the average demographic increase: in other words, recognising aborti?n as a means of birth control, have a as a result found themselves in a serious predicament.

When abortion was legalised in Japan in 1948, the birth rate dropped to 13.5 per thousand. The authorities were suddenly faced with a bitter fact namely the shortage of young people, the backbone of the manpower needed for industry .If to this be added the growing numbers of old people in society, it will be seen that the ratio of the productive section of society tends to grow smaller while that of tile unproductive section of society (infants and aged people) tends to grow larger. This state of affairs would in time lay a heavy burden on the youth of society, resulting in serious shortcomings for national productivity.

(In Rumania on the other hand, the legalisation of abortion in 1956 as been followed by a sharp increase in the number of legal bortion cases. In 1958 it equalled a fourth of the number o pregnancies. In 1959 it rose to a third and was still on the crease). The state soon realised that the matter was get time out of hand when the number of induced abortions began exceed considerably that of births. Under these circimsta res, it was felt the nation would be committing a kid of suicide through extinction. Consequently, Rumani began to retrace its steps by restricting abortion to cases ustified on medical grounds. It also sought to encourage polation growth by awarding compensations and allowances for childbearing and for large families, by granting maternit leave with full pay and by exempting large families from taxtion. The real problem facing the State in such a situation ould be that the young people of a society would find the elves burdened with the support of an unduly large sec ion of aged people and infants.

We would get clearer view of the associated circumstances if we took a look at the British experience. Since 1929, the law sanctione abortion if pregnancy posed a threat to the woman's life r health. Ever since the Bourne case and the acquittal of Dr.Bourne, things have proceeded smoothly, doctors enjoy ng enough freedom in the fulfilment of their duties or ev n at times in getting the better of the law. Nevertheless in 1967 an amendment was issued which authorised physicians to abort a patient if (I) the threat to ber life through conti ed preganncy was greater than that posed by abortion: (2) continued pregnancy posed a threat to her physical or pscyho ogical health or the health of the children of the the family whether her own children, her husband's children, or adolpted children): (3) there was a strong likelihood that the infant carried would be born abnormal or deformed. In assessing 'threat' the law urged th the woman's situation at present and in the forseeable fut re be taken into consideration. 

There was no doubt that the legislation was not made in response to demands pressed forward by the medical profession. On the contrary, the fact that new legislation was beIng contemplated led the Royal College of Obstet clans and Gynaecologists to propose the forming of a committee from the medical and legal professions being more qualified than laymen to understand and discern the proble and complexities involved to formulate a draft for the desired legislation. This proposal was not taken up. Outside pressures intervened to prevent the participation of the professionals in the matter. A widespread campaign procee ed to mobilise public opinion in favour of the permissive legislation enacted in other countries, frankly proclaiming that a woman should not be forced to carry an unwanted baby. Unwillingness on the part of a woman to carry a baby, it was urged, should be regarded as sufficient grounds for gr nting her abortion.

Sir Thomas Jeffcoate, then president of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, openly declared n the BBC that the 1967 Law had been hatched up by a small but powerful group of agitators which was able to sway public and parliamentary opinion by insidious propaganda and fact distortion, succeeding in stirring up emotions by painting fanciful pictures rather than by sticking to plain facts and figures. "Although statistics for casualties resultin from illegal abortions were available,"Professor Jeffcoate continued, "those had been ignored, grossly exaggerated figures being cited instead. The press was exploited to brainwaSh the nation, and with funds brought in from abroad, a pamphlet was printed and circulated explaining the new law in prejudicial and subversive terms. When professtonal groups expressed their willingness to take part in deliberating on the new legislation, a member of Parliament retorted 'We are not hereto listen to professional opinion or advice we are here to legislate. "This story, told by Professor Jefftoate, serves to illustrate the sort of intimidation which the professions might come up against, and how free public opinion might be cowed into silence. The truth is that the new law did not come up with anything significantly qovel. All it did was to legalise abortion if pregnancy posed a threat to the physical or even psychological health of any for the family's members including adopted children. Strang it is indeed, if we are to grant abortion on the grounds that the baby to be born might hurt the feelings of one of this siblings, be they natural born or adopted. It was left to the doctor to decide this question. Let us now see what the consequences of these measures were.

In effect, the doctor who was, prior to this legislation, governed by his conscience in deciding whether an abortion was to be performed or not, continued to be governed by that same conscience. So long as the criteria of a man's conscience have not been subjected to the law, a great many physicians shall continue to be unswayed by social pressure and be guided by their own conscience in deciding wh ther an abortion is to be performed or not. Those on the ther hand who welcomed the new legislation with open arms were the bands of professional abortionists who used to carry out their activities clandestinely and now could come out into the open. True, the law stipulates that the operation be performed in an institution recognised by the Ministry of Health, but it does not require that a specialist should perform it. In the case of this group of practitione, their operations have acquired a legitimacy which they had not previously enjoyed. In fact the very people which the legislation sought to protect society from have no come under the protection of the law. Years later, it was insidiously felt that doctors ethically opposed to bortion were descriminated against in appointment in ospital gynaecology jobs. and the Royal College of Obstatricians and Gynaecologists are doing their best to protect them.

A great number of legal induced abortions follow in the wake of this legislation. It was evident that the state had not taken steps to meet this eventuality. In government hospitals over-crowding resulting from the admission of abortion cases seriously interfered with the treatment of other ailments, competing in the need for beds, operating roors and physician's time; it is estimated that half of the doctors time spent in his clinic and half of that spent in the operation room is taken by the abortion problem. Although the decision rested with the doctor, it was nevertheless observed that 40 percent of the abortions were performed in the small number of private institutions charging fees, a ratio far greater than that seeking the services of those same institutions for other ailments, whereas in the state hospitals only 60 per cent of the operations were performed.

It is to be noted however that, of the women granted abortion, 44 per cent were married, 47 per cent were unmarried girls and 9 per cent were divorcees, widows or separated from their husbands.

In other words, the total of abortion for the unmarried amounted to 56 per cent. One further point worth noting: the ratio of abortions performed for pregnant unmarried women in private institutions was double that performed in state hospitals.

Medical circles strive hard to show the dangers involved in opening the doors wide to abortion. The British Medical Journal (30 May 1970) presented an analysis on abortion just after the Law was issued, which showed that the death ratio for legal abortion was 3 per thousand, a ratio slightly higher than deaths caused by childbearing in general (including births and abortions both legal and criminal). It also showed that abortion severely taxed the woman's future health, both physically and psychologically. Professor Jeffcoate even went so far as to affirm that doctors would show more kindness in the pitiable case of an unmarried pregnant woman by not aborting her, showing her instead the undesirable consequences which the operation would expose her to if performed. In his opinion, abortion is not the right solution to this problem, for legalised abortion would only lead to a loosening of sexual relationships and to slackness in the use of other contraceptive means. Time proved his views He tells the story of a girl who was aborted only to return few months later pregnant again. When the doctor showed his disapproval, she shrugged her shoulders saying, 'Can you stop yourself smoking?

One of the most catching things I read in one of the medical journals (BMJ, June 1971) was a protest again tt an advertisement appearing in the English 'Daily Telegraph' which read: 'From Holland -Special for Abortion -Cost of Trip: £105'. England had not passed any restrictive measures which applied to nonresident women; as a result, England became the mecca of abortion seekers. Special agencies were formed to organise the whole trip, including admission into hospital, stay in London, and return journey - all for a fixed sum as if it were a tour. Nowadays they are advertised in the press and their posters appealr in the London underground stations. Physicians in England whom the law does not force to perform the operation against their conscience are definitely better off however than their colleagues in some Eastern European countries where abortion is a woman's right, not to be denied. Doctors there are forced to peform the operation unless there a e medical grounds against their doing so, for they are state officials who cannot shirk their post's responsibilities -a terrible ordeal for conscientious men of principle.

Moral Background

The development outiined here for the legislation on abortion, from the wholly restrictive to the conditioned permissive to abortion on demand,' should not e viewed in an isolated, apstract manner. It is part of a picture which cannot be comprehended unless viewed as a whole. This movement is but a thread in a fabric, a step along a road, a segment of a whole.

After the First World War was invaded by two branches of a philosophy or perhaps it would e better to say same brand. The first denied God fundamentally as well as religion, denouncing the latter as opium of the people. It purported that the prophets were social reformers, who induce people follow them promised rewards they did not have and consequently referred an imaginary bank called Hereafter. This spread wide took hold mindscommanding now following nearly one half population. It aims foremost at evicting from soul installing substitute.

The other branch, on the other hand, moved in the direction of the religious communities, carving its way gradually into the Western Christian World. It began to preach a new doctrine which it called 'the New Morality;' Riding on the crest of scientific progress and the triumphs achieved by the human mind, it proceeded to extol this mind, urging people to glorify it, to take it as their guide and preceptor and to look upon it as the arbiter which should determine their actions and behaviour. What accorded with man's reason was right and what did not was wrong. Having thus succeeded in glorifying reason, it then proceeded to call upon man to lay his heritage before 'reason' to be reviewed and evaluated by the latter, unhampered by all the foolish and superstitious aspects of that inheritance which have or should have become obsolete. Reason, having thus become the highest authority in man's life, naturally proceeded to select afresh all that accorded with its dictates and to discard all that ran counter to them. In short, reason was installed in the place of the worshipped deity. It now became the supreme authority for man's actions, establishing or rejecting their validity as it saw fit.

In the midst of that sweeping wave of brainwashing, people failed to see that their new god was limited and deficient. For the mind can only see as far as the horizon, but beyond the visible horizon there exist innumerable other horizons hidden from man's perceptive faculties. Mind, by its very nature, is of impedect knowledge, the proof being that each new day brings along with it some new aspect of knowledge hitherto unknown. It is as if each new day branded our mind with imperfection. If we believed that our knowledge had become complete, then all scientific institutions and laboratories would close down and research budgets be stopped. Quite the opposite is true however. The greatest incentive to scientific research today is man's awareness of the vastness of his ignorance - and how immeasurably vast his ignorance is!

Reason began to review the old values, replacing them with new values: it also proceeded to review the "old morals" and to replace them with a new system of ethics more to its own liking. Under the banner of freedom, man began to preach the doctrine of 'freedom so long as no harm is done to others'.

This movement found support from another intellectual trend, namely, the trend preaching the gospel of 'Morality without Religion'. Ostensibly, this last stands apart from the movement outlined above, but in reality it tends to have the same effects. The doctrine it teaches is that man can and must love the good for its own sake and hate evil for the harm it does others. Let man love others, be truthful in his utterance, honest in his dealings, faithful in the performance of his duty; let him be of pleasant character and generous nature. Man can be all this without adopting any religion or adhering to any religious rites or prescriptions. To reinforce their stand, the advocates of this principle pointed out that people have always disagreed and always will disagree on the question of religion. The pages of history -specifically Christian history -with their tales of tragedies, horrors and strife all perpetrated in the name of religion -bear witness to that. Religion, the disciples of this movement maintain, is but a means of attaining certain ends. Since those ends are attainable, then all roads leading there to are equally praiseworthy. What is important is that man should be guided by his conscience. How often, they add, do we find pious men who perform all religious prescriptions and observe all the rites and rituals and yet prove to be cheats, of vindictive nature, corrupt or untrustworthy.

This appeal to virtue drew to it a large number of worthy people, a fact proving to be greatly advantageous to the movement. The basic idea in all this was that good and evil should have no fixed criterion laid down by a fundamental faith. Thus once the firm rock of faith is shaken, once God's teachings are supplanted by man's conscience, the next step is easy to take, for the new preceptor is gentle and kind, mild and easy to handle. Man, having discarded the armour of creed, donned instead the loose and easy garments of freedom, and so the question became simply one of time. Moreover, since man has become answerable to his own conscience rather than to God, the chinks in his new armour become countless, though often he may not be aware of their presence. As a result, man's psychological structure, being naturally suggestible, will loose its moorings. Just as iron can be softened by fire and made to assume new forms by continuous striking, man can also be moulded into new shapes and made to discard the old for the new. Predilection, suggestibility and malleability have always been part and parcel of the human ethos.

The spread of these ideas led to the loosening of the hold religion had upon people and the diminishing of the role it played in their lives. Instead of listening in reverence to the  teachings of religion, the voice of God grew dimmer to the ear: it gradually became a mere echo from the distant past. As the years went by, it became all too evident that the bulk of Western public opinion had become estranged from God, and even grew so bold as to attack Him. This might be attributed in part to the fact that traditional Christianity outdid itself in portraying God with physical characteristics and geographic dimensions, a picture totally unpalatable to man's reason in the age of science. I,and doubtless many others like me, were simply astounded when confronted in 1966 by the issue of Time Magazine whose cover bore the legend "Is God Dead?' The crack of doom, it seemed to us, must surely be approaching if such a widely-read magazine could brandish such ideas. Nevertheless, the magzine continued to thrash the subject out many times over, presenting views both for and against. Nor did the matter seem to produce the shock we had anticipated. The Church, as was only natural, did show an interest in investigating the causes that made people turn away from religion and in seeking ways by means of which it could redress the situation. Commenting upon some of the Church activities in this field, the magazine published in its 26 December 1969 issue (p. 40) an article entitled 'The New Ministry: Bringing God Back to Life.' The fruit is similar to the seed. It is not hard to see how a number of things prohibited in the past became permissible in the present.

Under the new slogan of the 'New Morality',standards underwent change. Since you do not harm others- and doing harm was given the most superficial interpretation - no guilt or embarassment need be attached to you actions. Of the standards undergoing change was the concept of sexual relationships. But on taking a closer look, we find that the new virtue is essentially the old vice. This was followed by a channelised and all-pervasive wave of sexperrneated films, pictures, light and selious reading matter, books of philosophy, songs, plays, fashion, commercials on radio and television, lectures and even persuasion on an individual basis. ..a comprehensive, well-coordinated movement bent upon a single course and with one object in view.

With enough patience and perseverance all this would grow in time into one huge social tidal wave, that would sweep along with it whole nations rather than isolated communities. These movements, it must be added, left no avenue unexplored to reach their ends. A psychology professor in a reputed university, issued a cautioning against sex complexes that might result from sexual repression! Bertrand Russell, in a televised talk just before his death, announced his satisfaction at having witnessed the realisation of the new pattern of sexual relationships between boy and girl university students through the discovery of contraceptives, which he had long advocated.

Even the Church was not immune to this intellectual invasion. A committee, appointed by the British Church Council, in a report on 'Sex and Virtue' denounced sexual exploitation but blessed sexual relationship in marriage; nevertheless it rejected the idea of continence before marriage or that of fidelity after it. It also refused to espouse the views of the Bible regarding adultery, declaring it permissible in certain cases between two willing adults if it formed a perfect total encounter (Time Magazine, 28 October 1966, p.38).The report then urged that single girls be provided with contraceptive means and called for more laxity in abortion legislation: This recalled to my mind the words of a certain English bishop I had read in the fifties which called on people to forego use of the word God' for one generation and he declared viewed the coming together bed of a young man woman through love not compulsion as charity. How far removed is this stand from that Jesus shown his words: Whosoever looks at with covetousness eyes has committed adultery heart."

No wonder then if these pressures have made them selves felt in Western societies, and no wonder too that they left their impact upon legislation, resulting in the new crop of abortion laws and other laws, one of which did not regard homosexuality as a criminal act so long as it was carried out between two adult men both of them willing. The power and expansion of the "gay movement" in certain societies at the present time is only too well known.

Under the screen of woman's emancipation, these same people urged that since man could practise sex freely, woman should be equally free to practise it, instead of saying 'since unchastity is improper to woman then it is equally improper to man.'

Young men and young women rushed headlong as moths rush towards fire. Medical circles began to be disturbed by the recrudescence of venereal disease in countries such as England and the States where it was believed to have been cornletely eradicated. The bacterial strains causing these diseases became gradually more and more immune to penicillin and other antibiotics, while syphilis and gonorrhoea became as rampant as they had been in the prepenicillin period, with however one distinction: the predominant age of those afflicted now ranges between 15 and 25. In 1965, 27 per cent of the girls attacked by the two diseases were below 20 years of age. Another distinction was that the ratio of casualties for females rose, outstripping that for males. The affected woman now was no longer yesterday's prostitute infecting many clients but the average girl -a student, a worker or an employee who had thrown caution to the wind. In America, Dr. W. Brown of the American Center against Venereal Diseases declared in 1965 that 650,000 of the American youth under twenty years of age catch syphilis or gonorrhoea every year and that during a one-year period the known cases of syphilis have increased by 55 per cent in New Jersey and 30 per cent in New York city. Similarly Dr. Mackenzie Pollock of the American Health Association announced that fresh cases have lately been reaching serious proportions and called for a state of national emergency (Time Magazine, July 27, 1970).

A clearer picture of the state of affairs is presented by the birth rates in England and Wales, showing a gradual decline over the years of legitimate babies, while the rate of out of wedlock births rising every year and might end up by representing most births.

It was stated earlier that the abortion statistics in England for year 1969 showed 47 percent of aborted women were marriedwhile 53 per cent not. The case is not unlike Sweden and many other countries.

All this evidence and all these factors and conditions serve to bring about and to foster moral retrogression as well as to promote the gereral international climate that activates the call for 'abortion for any woman unwanting her fetus,' Thus is revealed the real nature of the need for easily obtainable abortion, not on therapeutic grounds, but as a legitimate right such as air or water, which married and unmarried women alike have the right to demand.

We might find it hard to convince one who does not believe in religion at all of the call of religious texts. But religion itself, with God's grace, has urged us to seek wisdom and resort to gentle preaching and friendly persuasion. In this connection we would like to comment briefly on contemporary moral development. All that we are about to state here is true to the picture without undue exaggeration. Anyone who will trouble himself to glance at the output of the Western press, view the objects of contemporary art, or visit the West using his eyes to see, his ears to hear and his mind to reflect with, will soon be convinced of the truth of what we say.

A scientific look across known history from its origin to the present will reveal the indubitable fact that man is lord of all created beings representing the peak of biological evolution. Then we look at man's life from its primitive beginnings to the civilisation heights it has attained we perceive that man's civilisation was distinguished by, and rested on, one unique concept, namely man's control over his passions. Without the Faculty of 'self restraint' man would not have scaled the, heights of moral glory, nor would his intelligence have progressed along the path of scientific research.

If man were to give his passions free rein, mankind would become a community bent on self-destruction with disintegration of civilisation. History cites examples of empires that held sway, collapsing when they grew lax in curbing their passions. If the contemporary amoral trend were to be allowed to continue, there can be little doubt that our present civilisation would be planting into its body the seeds of its own extinction.

We believe in freedom, justice and fairness. We believe that woman should not have a lesser share in all these. Let us for the time being put religion aside and consider freedom, justice and fairness; let us raise our voice particularly about woman's freedom and her equality to man!

Taking these slogans as a guide, we maintain that any relationship between two people, whose consequences are not equally shared by the two, cannot possibly be considered as freedom, justice and fairness. Sex has been sanctioned on the grounds of equality between man and woman. But a glance will show that the results are distributed between them far from equally. Woman is always the losing partner . If she lives with a man and is then abandoned, she is the loser; if she becomes pregnant outside marriage and aborts, she is the loser: if she gives birth to a fatherless infant, she is the loser, regardless of whether she takes the baby with her to bring up, or whether she gives it up for adoption either to private individuals or to the State, no matter how well the child is taken care of. This is contrary to the concepts of equality, justice and fairness and it is definitely not in keeping with our own concept of woman's emancipation or our version of "women's lib.

This licentiousness - even on the basis of purely social concepts - is an act of injustice penetrated against woman, an exploitation and an unparalleled type of slavery, as well as an enjoyment of her own person without committing man to any duty or responsibility towards her, since any right over him is denied her.

Lust is portrayed as an irresistible power; chastity is held to be unreasonable and unacceptable, the idea that it belongs to the realm of fancy and is wholly impractical becoming firmly implanted in the mind, just as not too long ago virginity was said to be lost easily lost through bicycle or horse riding or through physical exercise, thus making it all the more easy to repudiate it without fear of shame.

Our Islamic societies offer proof of the West's misguided folly, but the West shuts eyes to the evidence. In our Moslem societies, including Christian communities living there, the virginity rate before marriage is in the region of one hundred per cent, regardless of the marriage age, affording sufficient proof that virginity is not beyond the reach of possibility. The causes behind this circumstance might be debated, but the fact remains that virginity is not out of reach.

In the face of this torrential flood, counter-movement cannot come about unless there appear reformers and sincere people truly concerned about enlightening youth as to the principles of true freedom and fairness. Virtue is a form of 'preventive medicine,' not only in so far as the medical field is concerned but on a much wider scale as well.

Behind the visible scene, there is a "movement" in which skill, cunning and power are at play, a movement that aims at undermining human societies and substituting therein strength for weakness, disintegration for close-knitted rela- tionships and mental torpor for alertness. Who knows but that in the near future all this would bear fuirt, enabling it to destroy whole social fabrics, hold whole societies in thrall and take over from them their rightful inheritance. Could it be that it aspires to gain mastery over the whole world, an ambition it sees as more easily obtainable through the poisoning of ideas and the demoralisation of people? Perhaps it has no scruples in carrying out its designs, believing as they do that they are God's chosen people and that the rest of mankind are but dumb beasts. Will the world forever remain blind to what is clear to the eye ? Will no one take it upon himself to head off the imminent peril? Is there none to fight for this most worthy cause or is it already too late?

Clearly, societies adopting liberal legislation on abortion look upon the fetus as a useless, lifeless offal to be rid of since it is 'unwanted! I have heard some British colleagues say in defending the legalisation of abortion. 'Whenever I sit in my clinic with one of these women coming to me with her problem, I feel first and foremost that the problem is a dual one concerning us two: the doctor and the patient. ..The truth is I have never sat in like manner with one of my patients and felt we were just two. I have always felt that along with us was a third silent party who was unable to present his own point of view, or defend his right to live as opposed to his mother's right to extricate herself from a predicament or to limit the number of her family.

This third party is the fetus ... the newcomer waiting at the door, to be opened to him following a fixed term.  The fetus is I and you and all of us.  He had the advantage over us in that upon arrival he will have his whole life laying ahead of him, whereas in our case we have left behind a goodly portion of our lives having only a portion remaining to us, longer or shorter as the case may be.

British nurses demonstrating against abortion

As soon as the sperm comes into contact with an ovum coming out of the ovary and starting its trip inside a duct leading to the womb, the sperm and ovum fuse to form one cell. In thirty hours- the longest waiting period in the life of the embryo -there occur changes within the cell enabling it to divide into two. The cell division then follows apace, first into four, then into eight, then into sixteen and so on. This cell mass aquires a fluid cavity and is called the blastocyst, which reaches the womb in a few days and proceeds to implant itself into its lining. Both prior and subsequent to this step, the cells divide steadily, until from conception to birth it increases from one to 200 million cells, and in size it increases thirty million times. The cells next proceed to cluster in groups, each going its separate way to form a segment of the embryo and then different organs in this segment- all this in the midst of constant unceasing activity. In the first month the weight increase is one million times: in the second 74 times: in the third eleven. and in the last, one-third of a time.

The eye cannot follow this prodigious activity. However it can discern in two weeks' time the lengthening of the embryo and distinguish the head from the tail part and the incipent appearance of his forty-four segments between 19 and 21 days. When the embryo is three weeks old, the brain bulge begms to appear as well as the mouth indentation, an incipient nose and ears, rudimentary intestines, and blood vessels into which blood is pumped by means of a primitive pulsating heart. Smoothly and with more and more stream-lining the embryo's shape grows well-defined while his internal organs develop. From the fifth to the eigth week his length increases from 5 mm to 3 cm: during this period the formation of the fetus is completed. With grace and streamlining, the embryo's features are perfected, so that by the time it is three months old, he may be regarded as a human being in miniature.

The embryo lives in the uterus inside a membranous sac filled with a liquid known as the amniotic fluid, in which it floats about freely, protected from the pressure of the uterine wall and having enough room for growth. It also drinks from and excretes his little urine in this liquid. This liquid is by no means stagnant; it is absorbed and secreted, constantly being renewed. However, the rate of the fetus' growth outstrips that of the swelling of the sac, and consequently of the uterus, the fetus continuously occupying more and more space. Whereas previously his faint gentle kicks and movements took place inside the fluid, by the end of the fourth month and afterwards they hit against the uterine wall and are therefore felt by the mother: a phenomenon called quickening.

In ancient times it was believed that the fluttering feeling felt by the mother against the wall of her womb indicated the flow of life into the fetus (this is what al-Ghazzali and others called 'the quickening of life'). Embroylogy however has shown that the fetus begins to move long before the mother can feel its movements. Moreover, modem equipment enables doctors to hear fetal heartbeats in the eighth week, although the heart starts beating even before that.

Embroyology has occupied a good deal of my time and life. The topic of my Ph.D. thesis was 'Studies in Normal and Abnormal Human Embroyogenesis" I have come to know the fetus in his or her various phases, arriving at the conclusion that the fetus is an individual. I have been unable to draw a line between the fetus as a human and as a non-human. I have moreover been unable to draw a line telling me where I would have to feel concern for the fetus and where I would have to disgregard it. As amatter of fact, one aspect of modern progress in general medical development is its concern for the fetus, and the emergence of a new medical specialisation in obstertics and paediatrics, namely "Fetology". Perinatal mortality has reached a fixed minimum. It was seen that there was no way of reducing that minimum except by tending the fetus while in the uterus. New diseases of the fetus in utero can now be diagnosed and treated. Research continues to perfect an artificial placenta to support the very prematurely delivered fetus. The scope of this branch of medicine has grown and is still growing.

A glance at the responsibility which the medical code of ethics imposes upon: the doctor vis-a-vis his patient will reveal the contradictions and flounderings of the medical profession, by advocating abortion or executing it. On the one hand it uses its skill in the savingof fetuses under its own care, while on the other hand with equal keenness it is ready to snuff out their lives and rob them of their of right to live for no otherreason that they are unwanted.

THE STAND OF ISLAM ON ABORTION

The worthy jurists among our ancestors had their own views on abortion. These views were unanimous on certain points and divergent on others. In prouncing a formal legal opinion (Fatwah), some of their individual judgements were :based on the medical beliefs prevalent in their age. One of these was to regard quickening as the sign of insillation of life into the fetus which took place four months after pregnancy had started.

We have shown that scientific progress over the centuries and the emergence of 'Eetology' as a speciality has proved beyond any doubt that the fetus starts moving long before , the mother is aware of his motion. His gradual development from a cell to a full-term infant is a flowing and continuous development, without there being any scientific dividing lines or clear boundaries separating one phase from the other.

As we see it, a legal opinion based solely on a scientific belief must change in accordance with the change this scientific belief has undergone. If the foundation changes, the structure above it must change too. Our forebears based , their legal Judgements on contemporary medical opinions at their time. It is time that new judgements are formulate on the basis of new knowledge. It is regrettable that some contemporary authorities tend to copy the ancients even when it comes to old medical opinions whose erroneousness has been exposed and which since have been superseded by other ideas. We will cite some of these ideas here, reiterating the need for new conclusions.

Clearly, the opinion one holds concerning abortion differs from that held as regards contraception. Whereas abortion is a direct assault against life and therefore a criminal act, the elements of the crime are lacking if pregnancy is prevented because a victim is non-existent, and there can be no crime where there is no victim.

Sheikh Mahmoud Shaltut, (late grand Imam of Al-Az har) in discussing the verdict on abortion said, "Scholars are agreed that after quickening takes place, abortion is prohibited to all Moslems, for it is a crime perpetrated against a living being" Hence blood ransom is due if the fetus is delivered alive and the 'ghorra' if delivered dead. The jurists were not, on the other hand, agreed whether to sanction or prohibit abortion if perfomed prior to the quickening phase.  Some felt it was permissible on the grounds that no life existed and therefore no crime could be committed. Others held that it was unlawful, maintaining that it already had inviolable life, that of growth arid preparation. Among the latter was the great master, Al-Ghazzali. He dealt with this question, distinguishing it fromf contraception saying, 'This (coitus interruptuspreventing pregnancy) is not the same as abortion 'and burying alive of newborn girls, for the two latter are crimes upon an existence that already is... The first grade of existence occurs when male matter fa11s into the womb, fuses with the ovum and gets ready to receive life. To destroy this is to commit a crime. The crime grows more and more serious as this matter passe from one phase to another, until it reaches its worst wen it is born alive" (Islam: Creed and Law, Darul Qalam, 3rd ed. 1966).

The author of Al-Khania (of the anafi scholars) on the other hand declares "I cannot speak or the legality (of this matter) , for the act of breaking an egg inside game falls under religious interdiction since the gg is the origin of the game. Since censure is incurred here the least that can be said is that a certain degree of crimi ality attaches itself to her action, that is if she aborts w.thout any grounds". (Quoted by Shaltut). A logical and uaint opinion, for no one can presume that the fetus in his other's womb even in its early days has far less right to live an the egg of a fowl.

Ali Ibn Wahban, (Quoted by Shaltut) commenting on the question of grounds, said that "one alid reason justifying abortion would be if the mother's milk dries up after pregnancy occurs and the father is too poor to hire a wet nurse". This view does not apply tod y since it is possible to prevent pregnancy by various means 11 easily accessible, of little expense or even freely provide by the State. Besides the fact that the age of wet nurses is over as a result of modem powdered milk for infant f, eding which can be obtained at little cost or which is supp ied by the State to the poor. This is far better than solving the problem of poverty through murder.

Commenting on the quickening of life, Sheikh Shaltut (Al Fatawa Al-Azhar 1959) says, "As they say, it does not occur until after the first four months. When, on the other hand, we speak of life taking place in the fourth month, we are actually referring to the perceptible life which the mother feels through them movements of the fetus, to which the term 'quickening of life' has been given". We believe we have dwelt at length upon scientific aspects of this question. We marvel however at Sheikh Shaltut continuing as follows: "It is this point", he says, "which enables us to conclude that the scholars' differences of opinion on the permissibility of abortion resulted from their unawareness or lack of grasp of these technical aspects of the question, leading them to regard the inviolaibility of abortion in this case as different from abortion if performed when formation is complete and quickening takes place. It may be said therefore that they are all agreed on the interdiction of abortion at any time during pregnancy". This was the stand adopted by Al-Ghazzali (Shaltut Al Fatawa) when he spoke of the grades of pregnancy from the time the first seed is sown, saying "To destroy such is a crime. If it becomes a clot of blood then the crime becomes more heinous. If life quicknes into it and it attains full formation then the 'crime becomes more heinous still. The crime becomes most heinous after it is delivered alive". There is consensus of opinion however when proof from a reliable source is obtained indicating that continued pregnancy, even after confirmation of the existence of life in the sense. given above, would definitely lead to the mother's , death.'  Islamic law (the Shari'a) in this case fundamentally ordains that the "lesser evil is to be perpetrated". If to preserv'e the life of the fetus would mean the death of the mother and there is no other way to save her life than by aborting the ferns then abortion in this case is authorised. The mother is not to be sacrificed to save the fetus for she is its originator. (Shaltut, Al Fatawa). Professor Mustafa Az-Zarqa (a notable contemporary scholar) propounds a view based on the stand of the Hanafi school (Law Journal, Aleppo, 26,1939). He divides the first four months into two stages: 'Either the fetus has begun to take shape', he says, 'some of his organs appearing, or not. If none of his organs have appeared then it may be aborted, in the opinion of a minority of jurists, for this would be quivalent to preventing a pregnancy (a statement which is obviously wrong), a permissible action, with the consent of the husband, for the fetus has not yet acquired any of the properties of man. The preponderant juristic opinion however is that abortion without justifiable grounds is a reprehensible action. Reprehensibility in this context, means interdiction by religion under the category of offence bordering on sin, for it (the fetus) is matter destined to form a future human being. Aborting it however carries only a religious responsibility but has no penal or civic consequences, unless abortion is effected without the husband's knowledge or as a result of an assault by a third party , in which case penal action in the form of castigation is incurred, castigation here entailing an undefined form of penalty left to the discretion of the judge, who is to take into consideration the aborter's condition and decide how much punishment would be sufficient to deter the perpetration of similar actions.

If during a pregnancy however some of the organs have begun to take shape, then the abortion of the fetus would be prohibited as such by singleirijudction to both husband and wife, and more forcefully to a third party unrelated to them. To perform abortion in this case, that is, after the fetus begins to assume shape or after the lapse of 120 days from conception, constitutes in the view of Islamic Law (the Shari's) an offence entailing sinful action as regards religion and the contingency of castigation in the form of a penalty by the Law, whether the aborter is the father or the mother or a third party unrelated to them. Abortion incurs yet a third responsibility a civic one, namely a financial surety: the aborter is required to pay a ransom for the fetus called a 'ghorra' (amounting to 500 silver dirhams, equivalent in the early days of Islam to 50 gold dinars or 75 gold dirhams, the dirham weighing approximately 31h gold grams). This 'ghorra' was handed over to the heirs of the aborted fetus. The aborter however, even if one of the heirs, pays the fine but cannot inherit any portion of it. All this is applicable to cases having no justifiable grounds for abortion. On the other hand, abortion is sanctioned on justifiable grounds, e.g. , if the mother's health cannot tolerate pregnancy or if she has a suckling baby who cannot do without milk and whc will be affected if he suckles a p.regnant mother's milk, the father's means being insufficient to the hiring of a wet nur~e. We have already stated our opinion regarding the first'case; as regards the other on the other hand, we feel it is inadmissible since (1) nowdays pregnency can be prevented easily, and (2) the baby can feed with artificial milk . Moreover, modem science has shown that there is no harm to the baby if he suckles a pregnant woman's milk.

However after the lapse of four months, abortion is not permissible unless the mother's life is in certainty of danger from continued pregnancy. For, in the latter case, the death of the mother would also mean the death of the fetus she is bearing, while abortion would preserve the mother's life. If any person aborts the fetus subsequent to the four-month period, be he one of the parents or a third party unrelated to them, he incurs the above religious, penal and civic responsibilities in more stringent measure than in the case of abortion performed prior to this four-month period of pregnancy. The religious guilt attached to the action is definitely considered greater. If the fetus is delivered alive but dies soon after, the responsible person must expiate his guilt in the same manner as when he is guilty of manslaughter (expiation being a religious penalty enjoining the freeing of a slave, or the giving of a certain amount of alms to 60 needy people or the observance of a 60 days fast if the guilty person is too poor). Penal castigation would similarly be more severe. The financial responsibility on the other hand entails the following: if the fetus is delivered dead, the aborter has to pay the 'ghorra' (ransom money) mentioned above, just as in the case where abortion takes place before the first four-month period of pregnancy but after the fetal organs have begun to differentiate. But if the fetus is expelled alive then dies, his aborter must pay the full ransom money due to a full man, which is equivalent to 10,000 silver dirhams. This ransom is distributed among the heirs in the same manner described above for the 'ghorra'. It will be observed that Islamic law, in cases where abortion is prohibited, has meted out the law equally, towards the two parents as well as towards a third party the responsibility incurred and the sentences, applying equally to all. In those cases where abortion is permissible however, decision rests with the parents alone, abortion here by a third party being prohibited and regarded as an assault upon life. Needless to add that the third party referred to above is not meant to apply to a doctor or midwife or any paramedical help whose experience will be called upon in the performance of an abortion.

We have something to say on the process of organ differentiation (the taking of shape) in the fetus. Ovulation in a woman (specifically, the rupture of a thin ovarian sac, the follicle, to discharge the ovum into the general cavity of the abdomen) takes place usually 14 days before the following menstruation. The ovum can be fertilised only during the space of one day. If in the course of that day a sperm reaches it, penterating its outer wall, fertilisation takes place; otherwise no fertilisation takes place and the next menstrual period follows. Fertilisation usually occurs inside one of two tubes (the oviducts) leading to the uterus. We have shown how the fertilised cell, now known as the egg, travels to the uterus, multiplying itself constantly, reaching the uterus in five or six days when it implants itself into the uterus, cell multiplication going on all the time. In other words, when the next menstrual period is due, pregnancy would have actually covered the two weeks stage of development.

Since in the case of most women it is not unusual that menstruation should sometimes be subject to irregularity, coming sooner or later than due, it is seldom that a woman can take notice, of a possible pregnancy except many days after its occurence. In other words, ascertaining scientifically that a pregnancy has occured means that the embryo will have actually covered a good time of its existence since fertilisation. We have shown that by that time it would have entered the phase of organ differentiation. Before we conclude this point however, we would like to reiterate our medical opinion that life in the sense of growing and feeding exists in the cell from the moment it begins subdividing, one day after fertilisation and two weeks before the next menstruation that was to take place, and that thereafter growth is one continuous process of smooth and harmonious progression.

While admiring and lauding the meritorious attempts of the jurists of old to formulate legal judgement on matters concerning which there is no explicit reference in the sacred scriptures, basing their opinion on scientific data available to them at the time, we would have liked at the same time to see judgements based, upon the scientific data available to us today.

We must here recount the Prophet's words on the 'Forties'. In this connection the Prophet ( of blessed memory ) said' Each one of you is possesses in formation within his mother's womb, first as a drop of matter for forty days, then as blood clot for forty days then as a blob for forty days, and then the angel is sent to breathe the spirit into him and writes his life span, sustenance and whether happy or miserable 'We hope however that this tradition of the Prophet's be not taken to mean that the embryo in its first 120 days of development is just waste matter which can be discarded at will. This is precluded by the legal implications, shown above, of induced (intentional) abortions or accidental ones, in the form of prohibition, castigation or fines prior to or subsequent to the 120 day period all of which were formulated in the light of this tradition of the Prophet.

The "Spirit" in Islam, is something only God knows the truth about God addresses the Prophet in the Quran". They put questions to you concerning the spirit. Say the Spirit is at my Lord's command and of knowledge only a meagre part has been impoarted to you" (17:85).

The Spirit is clearly different from "life" in Islam and no man not even the Prophet was given the knowledge of what it is. We believe in this saying of the Prophet as a matter of faith but of course we would not be permitted to legislate upon the basis of something we cannot comperhend i.e. the "Spirit" (Rooh).

To round the subject of organ differentiation in the embryo i.e., the appearance of any of his organs, we shall cite Imam Malik's opinion whereby he holds that the aborter is accountable for all conception products discarded by woman, be it a blob, a clot or simple blood. Ashhab (a Maliki jurist) on the other hand maintains that no responsibility attaches to the discharge of blood, but it does so to that of clot or blob, (Audeh, Islamic Criminal Law, 5th ed, 1968) lest discharge of blood alone be wrongly considered to indicate pregnancy with abortion. We repeat here that a microscopic examination can determine the presence of a pregenancy or the absence of it in almost all cases, with rare exceptions. In fact, Abu-Hanifa, like ash-Shafi'i, maintains that if a woman discharge blob in which no incipient fomlation can be observed but which is, according to the testimony of reliable authorities, already possessed in yet invisible foml the rudiments of human formation which would have taken shape had they been allowed to continue to exist, the woman's aborter in this case is also accountable. (Audeh, previous source). Testimony of reliable authorities translated into our modern temls, would mean medical diagnoses or tests. Criminal abortion therefore applies to the abortion of the embryo from its earliest stages, in fact at inception and from the moment there is reliable evidence that conception has taken place. What is left therefore are those rare cases when the accused may be given the benefit of doubt through the lack of conclusive evidence that pregnancy did occur, as a result for example of the loss of the aborted matter or the disappearance of the pregnancy evidence which could have been determined by the laboratory.

It has been shown that the fetus' ransom is separate from what is due to the mother in compensation for any harm done to her. However, compensation for her person is due to her alone, while that of the fetus belongs to its heirs, to the exclusion of the aborter if among them, in which case he wou id have to pay the ransom but not inherit therefrom. The ransom due to a fetus ('the ghorra) differs in accordance with the number of fetuses aborted. If the pregnant woman aborts two fetuses then the aborter has to pay two 'ghorras', and if three, he has to pay three.

It is worth noting the care with which Islamic Law surrounds the right of the fetus; Islamic Law does not regard material action as the only factor that might cause abortion. Other causative factors are recognised, such as deeds or utterances. We may list some of these nonmaterial causes: threatening a woman, scaring her, suddenly shouting at her, or a person of whom she stands in awe summoning her to his presence or calling on her unannounced. This point is illustrated by a famous incident. Umar ibn Al-Khattab (second caliph) summoned a woman he used to call on to his presence. At this the woman exclaimed 'Woe is me! Why would Umar want to see me?' While on her way there, filled with apprehension as she was, she was overtaken by pains, aborting a fetus who emitted two cries and died. Umar sought the advice of the companions of the Prophet (of blessed memory) on this matter. Some opined that Umar had incurred no blame, were it not for the fact that he was governor and hence a castigator. As Ali kept silent, Umar turned to him saying 'What do you say to that, Abou- Hassan?' Ali answered, 'If it was their opinion they had given, then they have erred in that opinion; if on the other hand they spoke to oblige you, they have not given you good advice. Yours it is to pay the fetus' ransom, for in terrifying the woman you have caused her to abort'. Umar acted as Ali had advised.

Evidence of the 'Right to Life' of the Fetus

We have presented several opinions regarding the question of the legalisation of induced abortion. It is clear that the opinion advocating its absolute legalisation does not give the fetus the regard due to it as a human being.

We have shown that the Islamic attitude on the other hand is unanimous in considering the fetus as a human being ith a right to live. To deprive him of this right is prohibited by religion, unless there are strong grounds justifying the step that far outweigh the destruction of the fetus' life. We have also expressed an opinion oil the other types of penalisation castigation and fines.

Islamic law lays stress upon the regard due to man as man, while the right of the fetus to life stands apart from the question of abortion. Were the woman to be deprived of her right to life, this right would still be retaIned by the fetus. For the jurists are unanimously agreed that if a pregnant woman were sentenced to death, the execution would be postponed until she gave birth before the arm of the law can touch her. This applies even if her pregnancy is illegitimate. The Prophet (God's blessings be upon him) deferred punishment of a pregnant adulteress until she was delivered of her baby. According to another tradition, punishment was deferred until the woman nursed the baby. This perhaps serves to indicate that pregnancy occuring out of wedlock does not constitute grounds for depriving the fetus of his right to life, regardless of whether the fetus had been formed or shaped or quickened.

The fetus has also the right, if aborted with visible symptoms of life, such as the moving of a finger, breathing, coughing, sneezing or any other like symptoms, to inherit from any of his legators who had died prior to the abortion provided it is established that pregnancy had occured before the death of that legator. If the fetus dies thereafter he can transmit inheritance to his legal heirs

A man might die leaving behind him a pregnant wife; a portion of the inheritance left by the father or by any other legator equal in portion to that of one male child or one female child, whichever is the greater is to be set apart for the fetus (enjoined according to most by the Hanafi school of theology), for the single rather than the multiple birth is the general rule. It is true, some jurists consider that portions for twins or triplets or quadruplets are to be set aside; if the woman then gives birth to one child, the remainder is to be restored to the rest of the inheritors, in accordance with their shares. Those who are of the opinion that a single child's portion should be reserved to the fetus require however that the heirs should provide a person to act as security for them, in the event the woman gives birth to more than one child, in which case the portion of the additional child would be reclaimed from them.

This is the fetus. These are his distincitive characteristics and these are his rights in Islam. I believe, guided by my observations as a physician and my senses as a Moslem, that the grounds for abortion in its early stages should be restricted to the situation of certainty of danger in the immediate present or future to the mother's life lor health.

In all other cases, life should not be destroyed. Means of contraception are permissible and within easy reach. It would be far better to use them thereby preventing something from happening rather than allowing it to happen and then destroying it.

To say on the other hand that a fetus is unwanted is mere delusion and a pretext. We have conducted a survey on a group of women married who had demanded to be aborted but were denied abortion. When they were delivered of their babies, we asked each of them if she still felt that her baby was unwated; the reply of one and all was in the negative. BEING UNWATED IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO BE KILLED.