Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 387 posts

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#11

Post by anon291 »

rootusrootus wrote: post #9
hirundo wrote: post #3

> Newborns do feel pain. Presumably it doesn't switch on from nothing at birth, and pre-borns feel pain too. I'm pro-choice on abortion, but perhaps we should at least anaesthetise the fetus before late term abortions. Is that done? Or is their pain denied? Or is compassion toward that pain too difficult in the circumstances?

IIRC the consensus is that a fetus likely starts to experience pain in the second trimester. Over 90% of all abortions happen in the first trimester.

Do they anesthesize the child in the other 10%?

EDIT: Answered my own question: apparently only in Utah as of 2016: http://www.healthlawpolicy.org/fetal-anesthesia/`

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#12

Post by rootusrootus »

anon291 wrote: post #11
rootusrootus wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC the consensus is that a fetus likely starts to experience pain in the second trimester. Over 90% of all abortions happen in the first trimester.

Do they anesthesize the child in the other 10%? EDIT: Answered my own question: apparently only in Utah as of 2016: http://www.healthlawpolicy.org/fetal-anesthesia/ `

I can't answer that. I know the basic statistics, as it was not long ago a question my wife and I sought out the answers to, but I don't know anything deeper about medical policies.

I suspect that answer is probably some version of no. Aren't most abortions just induced miscarriages anyway?

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#13

Post by anon291 »

rootusrootus wrote: post #12
anon291 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they anesthesize the child in the other 10%? EDIT: Answered my own question: apparently only in Utah as of 2016: http://www.healthlawpolicy.org/fetal-anesthesia/ `

I can't answer that. I know the basic statistics, as it was not long ago a question my wife and I sought out the answers to, but I don't know anything deeper about medical policies. I suspect that answer is probably some version of no. Aren't most abortions just induced miscarriages anyway?

I was asking about the minority that aren't. Typically, exceptions to the rule are the most interesting.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#14

Post by happytoexplain »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #4

This is, I believe, one of the downsides of empiricism and the fixation on citation rather than observation and reason. The idea that a whole profession came to reject the idea that infants are able to feel pain is astonishing, especially considering anyone who has ever taken care of infants knows that these little human beings react to things which are known to be painful. Babies feeling pain is something that shoul…

I feel like it's the opposite - that, historically, many people (regardless of profession) always generally assumed that certain living things did not feel pain or otherwise suffer for some definition of suffering. This status quo naturally persisted into the era of science until science demonstrated it to be wrong in this case. Should they have known better, sooner? Obviously - I don't fully comprehend what could lead to such a bizarre and terrible assumption. But the problem seems to predate the age of empiricism and medical science.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#15

Post by jjulius »

anon291 wrote: post #11
rootusrootus wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC the consensus is that a fetus likely starts to experience pain in the second trimester. Over 90% of all abortions happen in the first trimester.

Do they anesthesize the child in the other 10%? EDIT: Answered my own question: apparently only in Utah as of 2016: http://www.healthlawpolicy.org/fetal-anesthesia/ `

>Do they anesthesize the child in the other 10%?

That answer is heavily nuanced and is likely difficult to answer. First, there's the likelihood that some of that 10% occurred very early in the second trimester but prior to the development of the ability to feel pain. One should also consider the circumstances of each specific abortion relative to whether or not they would feel pain.

>EDIT: Answered my own question: apparently only in Utah as of 2016: http://www.healthlawpolicy.org/fetal-anesthesia/

Your link very clearly states that Utah is the only state, as of 2016, that legally requires the use of anesthesia. Lack of legal requirement does not mean a lack of anesthesia whatsoever in other states.

Edit: This sort of thing is never as black-and-white as one would like it to be, which complicates these discussions given the high level of emotions involved.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#16

Post by scarmig »

hirundo wrote: post #3

> Newborns do feel pain. Presumably it doesn't switch on from nothing at birth, and pre-borns feel pain too. I'm pro-choice on abortion, but perhaps we should at least anaesthetise the fetus before late term abortions. Is that done? Or is their pain denied? Or is compassion toward that pain too difficult in the circumstances?

Makes me wonder how painful going through birth is for the infant. I can't imagine it's pleasant.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#17

Post by anon291 »

jjulius wrote: post #15
anon291 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they anesthesize the child in the other 10%? EDIT: Answered my own question: apparently only in Utah as of 2016: http://www.healthlawpolicy.org/fetal-anesthesia/ `

>Do they anesthesize the child in the other 10%? That answer is heavily nuanced and is likely difficult to answer. First, there's the likelihood that some of that 10% occurred very early in the second trimester but prior to the development of the ability to feel pain. One should also consider the circumstances of each specific abortion relative to whether or not they would feel pain. >EDIT: Answered my own question:…

> Lack of legal requirement does not mean a lack of anesthesia whatsoever in other states.

I guess I was asking if anyone knew, because that article is the only thing I could find on it.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#18

Post by [deleted] »

scarmig wrote: post #16
hirundo wrote: post #3

> Newborns do feel pain. Presumably it doesn't switch on from nothing at birth, and pre-borns feel pain too. I'm pro-choice on abortion, but perhaps we should at least anaesthetise the fetus before late term abortions. Is that done? Or is their pain denied? Or is compassion toward that pain too difficult in the circumstances?

Makes me wonder how painful going through birth is for the infant. I can't imagine it's pleasant.

[deleted]

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#19

Post by dane-pgp »

sydd wrote: post #6

It's fucking scary, that this was recognized in 1987. In the 80s and even in the 90s most places did complex operations on newborns without any kind of painkillers -- imagine a heart surgery without painkillers. Not to mention "simple" stuff like circumcision. Also by this time they knew this about animals too. I think people will look at us as barbarians that we ate them when we knew that they feel pain, can sense t…

> Not to mention "simple" stuff like circumcision.

You might have stumbled upon the real reason for this seemingly inexplicable delay in accepting that infants can feel pain: The circumcision industry. Presumably some doctors feared that parents would think twice about it if they knew that their son would be in agony (or need expensive painkillers) when undergoing that elective surgery.

https://www.endalldisease.com/baby-foreskin-in-cosmetics-the...

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#20

Post by nonameiguess »

anon291 wrote: post #11
rootusrootus wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC the consensus is that a fetus likely starts to experience pain in the second trimester. Over 90% of all abortions happen in the first trimester.

Do they anesthesize the child in the other 10%? EDIT: Answered my own question: apparently only in Utah as of 2016: http://www.healthlawpolicy.org/fetal-anesthesia/ `

Anyone getting an abortion (at least an invasive late term abortion that isn't just induced miscarriage) is going to have some form of anesthesia administered. Since they share a bloodstream, giving general anesthetic to the mother also anesthetizes the fetus. Whether local shares an effect or not I think depends on the type, but it is usually administered along with a sedative. It appears from this that most sedatives other than muscle relaxers will also sedate the fetus, but whether local anesthetic crosses the placenta depends on a lot of things: https://www.openanesthesia.org/placental_transfer_anesth_dru...

Here is a study of how effective various forms of anesthesia are for abortions, but it's not going to tell you the prevalence with which each form is actually used: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK561096/

Unfortunately, for various reasons, there is quite a bit of need for privacy on both the patients and the providers parts as the act of getting or performing an abortion will make you a target in a lot of places.

Post reply on HN