I think almost every reasonable person would agree that any fetus who can survive outside a mother is a person, and that personhood starts at some point before that viability test; I think there is a lot of room to discuss a question of personhood in the first few weeks of development.
My personal view is that personhood requires a mind, and here on our physical earth, a mind requires a brain with some level of development. My personal view is that level of development is not reached in the first trimester. You are perfectly free to disagree with me on this! I am not trying to unduly influence anyone's point of view. I cannot say you are wrong if you disagree!
I would like to gently point out that there are facts in this discussion, but there are also opinions, deeply held beliefs and analysis. Only the facts can be fact checked. The opinions, beliefs and analysis require some kind of framework for discussion.
Yuck. Of all the comments I see, the ones from lawyers seem the most human and less misanthropic or so purposefully obtuse as to suggest one has no connection to society at all, etc, like I see from so many developers drooling over their edge-case applications of definitions as if the law was some sort of "whatever you can say goes" as opposed focusing on what actually makes sense.
That's problematic right there. A child can't survive without any support until some years after birth, and the age at which a foetus can survive with support keeps getting younger due to technical advances. At some point fully artificial wombs will be able to allow a foetus to survive outside their mother from conception.
Deciding personhood based on our tech level doesn't seem very reasonable.
> My personal view is that personhood requires a mind
That seems more reasonable. Attainment of consciousness seems like a reasonable differentiator, but there's a difficulty is in establishing when that is.
Yes. I can't completely square the circle. There's a lot of undefined area, a lot of discomfort, but I am comfortable with my level of discomfort and ignorance for now.
---
I don't think a viability test or a theory of the mind is sufficient on it's own, I view them as lines of evidence. I am open to other lines of evidence. I also think that the unbroken chain of life that leads to a new baby is a miracle, whether you think of it as a divine miracle or a secular miracle.
Why? This strikes me as begging the question.
That has the merit of being clear-cut and to avoid a lot of arguments.