Legal protection of the unborn child: A proposal to amend Articles 40 and 41 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines

The question of when human life begins is a profoundly intricate one, with widespread implications, ranging from abortion rights, to stem cell research and beyond. A key point in the debate rests on the way in which the concepts of humanity, life and human life are defined. What does it mean to be alive? What does it mean to be human? Is conception the starting point of human life? Is a zygote or an embryo alive? If it is, is it a human being? Is there really a difference between a human being and a person? These are complicated philosophical questions that often incite intense debate for their answers are used as evidence in the answers to questions about the moral and legal status of a zygote, embryo, fetus or unborn child. In the late nineteenth century, following the discovery of fertilization, the debate about abortion within the Church tipped in favor of its now familiar position that human life begins at conception, and is maintained to the present day. Although sharing the same nature with all human beings, the unborn individual, like each one of us, is unlike any that has been conceived before and unlike any that will ever be conceived again. The unborn child is not a becoming who is striving toward being. The unborn child is not a potential human life but a human life with great potentiality. It is right if it means that the physical facts of science, without any moral reflection on our part, cannot tell us what is right and wrong. But it is wrong if it means that the physical facts of science cannot tell us to whom we should apply the values of which are already aware. The interaction between the law and science is increasing, and the two disciplines must learn to work together for the good of society. The researchers believe that to be consistent with contemporary science, legal protection must be extended to the unborn entity from the moment of conception