Fetal Rights for Drug, Other Babies

“Drug Babies Push Issue of Fetal Rights” immediately caught my eye as I picked up my morning paper (April 25). Fetal rights for drug babies? I thought Roe vs. Wade guaranteed that no fetal rights--including life--could take precedence over the mother’s rights, even her right to kill her unborn child deliberately through the agency of a doctor and a few tools. Why would inducing drug dependency in the unborn or subjecting her fetus to the dangerous side effects of her own drug abuse be considered worse than terminating the fetus’ life?

Unfortunately, your article didn’t clear up the mystery for me. Too often I read articles on controversial issues whose authors think they’re being objective because they give an equal number of column inches to each side. Rarely do I read an article whose author has probed behind the rhetoric to the root issues of the controversy. It’s too bad this article counted inches rather than arguments.

Why are third parties charged with crimes against fetuses but mothers aren’t? Why can government agencies, including courts and social services, intervene in prenatal care but not in abortion? Why was Laura Moute (who was 7 months’ pregnant and a cocaine user) wrong to want her unborn child to die from drug abuse when any California woman has the right (protected by state and federal courts) to terminate through abortion a pregnancy that is 7, 8 or even 9 months along?

Could it be that, at least as far as the unborn are concerned, one’s value is determined by whether or not one is wanted? What an idea! One’s humanness increases with the number of people who care! How awe-inspiring to think that the Bon Jovis and Princess Dianas of this world are more human than I!

GRETCHEN PASSANTINO

Costa Mesa