SELECTED REFORM RESPONSA

simply:"While the fetus is within the body of the mother, it may be destroyed, even though it is alive, for every fetus that does not come out into the light of the world is not to be described as a nefesh."

The second basis for this principle in the law is based on the Mishnah , Oholot 7: 6, and codified in the Shulhan Arukh, Hoshen Mishpat 425:2, namely, that if the birth is difficult and the mother seems likely to die, one may destroy the child in order to save the mother. Of course, if the child puts out from the mother’s body as much as its forehead, it is already a nefesh, and the law is that one may not set aside(dohin) one nefesh in favor of another.

Since, therefore, the child is not a nefesh, abortion becomes basically permissible. Of course one may not destroy the unborn child without adequate reason, such as the health of the mother. But just as the mother, to save her life, may, if need be, sacrifice a finger or an arm or a leg, so she may sacrifice the unborn fetus if her health requires it, since the fetus is called"the leg or the thigh of the mother"(uber yerekh imo; Hullin 58a)

The situation was summed up best by the late Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel, Ben Zion Uziel , in his Mishp'tei Uziel, 111, 46 and 47. I quote his statement from Recent Reform Responsa, p. 193. Uziel concluded as follows:"An unborn fetus is actually not a nefesh at all and has no independent life. It is part of its mother, and just as a person may sacrifice a limb to be cured of a worse sickness, so may this fetus be destroyed for the mother's benefit."

Of course Uziel reckons with the statement of the 7osfot to Hullin 33a that a Jew is not permitted(lo shari) to destroy a fetus, although such an act is not to be considered murder. He says that one may not destroy it. One may not destroy anything without a reason. But if there is a worthwhile purpose, it may be done. The specific case before him concerned a woman who was threatened with permanent deafness if she went through with the pregnancy. Uziel decided that since the fetus is not an independent nefesh, but is only a part of the mother, there is no sin in destroying it for her sake.

204