{"id":215743,"date":"2019-12-23T15:26:33","date_gmt":"2019-12-23T21:26:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=215743"},"modified":"2019-12-23T16:04:07","modified_gmt":"2019-12-23T22:04:07","slug":"feminist-third-trimester-abortion-baby-person","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/feminist-third-trimester-abortion-baby-person\/","title":{"rendered":"Feminist argues for third trimester abortion while admitting preborn baby is a person"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

In a March 13, 2000, article in The Nation defending third trimester abortion, pro-abortion activist Karen Houppert makes a striking concession: most pro-abortion feminists \u201cdon\u2019t disagree\u201d that a preborn baby is a person.<\/p>\n

Houppert wrote her article in response to one by ‘less extreme’ abortion supporter Gregg Easterbrook, who wrote that third trimester abortions should be illegal. To support his argument, Easterbrook said that by the third trimester, the brainwave patterns of babies in the womb are identical to those of newborns. Easterbrook says the \u201chopelessly confusing viability standard should be dropped in favor of a bright line drawn at the start of the third\u00a0trimester, when complex fetal brain activity begins.\u201d He claims these brainwaves are a \u201csign of formed humanity\u201d that prove the baby\u2019s \u201cpersonhood.\u201d<\/p>\n

Using a completely arbitrary standard, Easterbrook wants to base abortion laws on brain development. He feels that the brain is only developed enough for the child to have a right to life in the third trimester. And yet, this is well after the child can survive outside the womb.<\/em><\/p>\n