Dorland’s Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers:

fetus /fe·tus/ (fēt´us) [L.] the developing young in the uterus, specifically the unborn offspring in the postembryonic period, in humans from nine weeks after fertilization until birth.

The American Heritage® Medical Dictionary:

ba·by (bb) n.  A very young child; an infant.

In Wisconsin, a couple of Republican lawmakers think families should be able to file lawsuits if someone causes a fetus to die at any point during pregnancy. That would give an embryo a fetus, a blastocyst  (a sphere of about 150 cells) or even a zygote (a fertilized egg) the same status as their mother.

So much for women’s rights.  So much for trusting women to decide for themselves what they need, what is good or bad for their bodies, their lives, their safety, their survival, their health (both physical and mental), and their families. So much for the civil and human rights of an already born person.

It’s obviously better for women if other people, total strangers who work for that coveted “small” government, force them to give birth no matter what the circumstances since they insist on full “personhood” for a few cells or a fetus. After all, whose judgment would you trust with the most personal decisions you could make? Yourself or “big government”? Yourself or a few men and women who think they should control you?

By the way, a recent study shows anti-choice policies lead to widespread arrests of and forced interventions on pregnant women:

This study, however, confirms that if passed, so called “personhood” measures would: 1) provide the basis for arresting pregnant women who have abortions; and 2) provide state actors with the authority to subject all pregnant women to surveillance, arrest, incarceration, and other deprivations of liberty whether women seek to end a pregnancy or not.

Furthermore, the study demonstrates that there is no way to add fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses to state constitutions or to the United States Constitution without removing all pregnant women from the community of constitutional persons. These measures create a “Jane Crow” system of law, establishing a separate and unequal status for all pregnant women and disproportionately punishing African-American and low-income women.

Declaring that life starts at conception gives a cluster of cells the same rights as born people. So fetal rights would supersede those of women. If conception takes place outside the United States, would the zygote still be an American citizen?

Associated Press:

Two Republican lawmakers have introduced legislation that would allow parents to sue if a their unborn child dies as a result of someone’s wrongful acts, but it would do so by redefining state law to say life starts at conception.

Current law allows wrongful death lawsuits in a fetus’ death only if a doctor concludes the fetus was old enough to survive birth.

Once commenter had this to say:

mojo:

As I understand it, a woman is born with all the eggs she will ever have. So, ALL women are carrying the unborn preborn — they’re just unfertilized. But aren’t these unfertilized children entitled to the same rights as other hard working middle class tax payers? Does Rep. Jaque not care about the unfertilized preborn unborn? Shouldn’t his bill say that when ANY woman dies, the person responsible for the death should also be charged with homicide x (number of fertile months estimated to have been remaining in the deceased’s fertile life)? Rep Jacque, why have you foresaken the unborn preborn just because they might be unfertilized? An egg is alive, you know.

And, if a female fetus dies, it, too, carried eggs — more unborn preborn — shouldn’t the person convicted of the death of the fetus also be charged with the death of that fetus’s unborn preborn? Doesn’t Rep Jacque care about these children?

So “pro-lifers,” if you believe so strongly that the unborn are worth protecting, please answer these questions for us: