# Why isn't a placenta human life? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 11, 2008, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163 "2008-11-11T05:22:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2008, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163/61 "2008-11-11T21:09:10Z")
> [@Jesus\_Harold\_Christ](#): > > It is my understanding that the placenta can maintain its biological functions (be alive) even after the fetus has died. This suggests to me that the placenta is not an organ of the fetus, but a seperate (but connected) entity. I’ve never heard that, but I’m guessing it still has to be attached to the mother. If you detach it from both, it won’t last long. (You can cut a heart out and it will continue beating for a while too. Did that in biology class with a frog heart once.) ---
**Author:** ![Jesus\_Harold\_Christ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f14d63/32.png) [@Jesus\_Harold\_Christ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jesus_Harold_Christ)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2008, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163/62 "2008-11-11T21:14:04Z")
And the unborn embryo/fetus has to be attached to the mother. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGrenze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dbc845/32.png) [@KarlGrenze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGrenze)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2008, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163/63 "2008-11-11T21:14:21Z")
> [@Jesus\_Harold\_Christ](#): > > It is my understanding that the placenta can maintain its biological functions (be alive) even after the fetus has died. This suggests to me that the placenta is not an organ of the fetus, but a seperate (but connected) entity. Most organs retain part of their biological functions and keep some level of function even after the organism itself has died, depends on its metabolic needs. Heck, hearts keep beating on snakes even after the snake itself is dead, out, not going to return. The heart eventually stops, though. On a similar vein, horses’s muscles keep kicking and guts keep sliding and moving for a short time after dead. Does not make them a separate entity of the organism. The placenta may be the same way, it may still do some gas exchange/digestive process after the fetus has died, but it is not a separate entity. It has no organs of its own. It was developed by the fetus. It WILL die without ever be capable of reproducing itself. It is not a separate biological entity, not matter what you think. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGrenze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dbc845/32.png) [@KarlGrenze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGrenze)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2008, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163/64 "2008-11-11T21:15:47Z")
> [@Jesus\_Harold\_Christ](#): > > And the unborn embryo/fetus has to attached to the mother. Yes, and the embryo/fetus created the placenta. It is not a separate biological entity, despite what you say. Go read an embryology chapter (general embryology, does not have to be a human text). Come back later. ---
**Author:** ![Jesus\_Harold\_Christ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f14d63/32.png) [@Jesus\_Harold\_Christ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jesus_Harold_Christ)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2008, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163/65 "2008-11-11T21:21:05Z")
> [@KarlGrenze](#): > > Yes, and the embryo/fetus created the placenta. It is not a separate biological entity, despite what you say. Go read an embryology chapter (general embryology, does not have to be a human text). Come back later. I would say they both develop out same biological mass. One part develops inot an embryo/fetus and the other into the placenta. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2008, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163/66 "2008-11-11T21:28:22Z")
> [@jsc1953](#): > > Personally, I’m pro-choice. But I always like to argue both sides of a question. > > I don’t think you need to go back very far in human history to find the answers; and keep in mind that societal proscriptions on abortion pre-date our knowledge of reproductive biology. IMHO, it stems from the biological imperative to reproduce; therefore, babies = good. Embryos become babies; therefore, embryos = good. > > Where philosophy & religion come into play, is in the larger question of “why do we value life?” If you assume a fetus is alive (and beyond a certain point, any primitive expectant mother would be able to tell you that), I could see where it would fall under any society’s umbrella of living things worth protecting. While those are certainly possible answers as to why fetuses should be protected, they aren’t ones as to why fetuses should be treated as things they are not yet, while us adult humans shouldn’t be, which seemed to be the specific problem **JHC** brought up which you disagreed with. If that fetuses will, one day, be living, breathing, thoughtful beings, and so should treated with respect now while they are not, what is to stop us using the same logic to say that humans will one day be dead, and that we should be treated with all the respect shown a corpse? It’s a silly thing to say, but it seems perfectly in keeping with the logic given - that’s why we need to know the reason behind it, so that we can know whether there’s an exception that needs to be made, a reason why the logic doesn’t extend that far. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGrenze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dbc845/32.png) [@KarlGrenze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGrenze)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2008, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163/67 "2008-11-11T21:34:33Z")
> [@Jesus\_Harold\_Christ](#): > > I would say they both develop out same biological mass. One part develops inot an embryo/fetus and the other into the placenta. The blastocyst, which goes on to develop into an embryo. The placenta is an organ, it is recognized in biology as an organ, not as a separate identity. You’re the one that keeps insisting it is a separate entity, when in reality, it is not. It is not composed of other organs nor is developing multiple organs. It serves as a respiratory/digestive/endocrine system to the developing mass (if you insist of removing the potential organism part, be it human, dog, cat, cow, etc.). ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163/68 "2008-11-12T01:40:04Z")
A placenta is human life in the same way an arm is human life. A fetus is _a_ human life, or at least the early stages of one. “Human life” and “A human life” are distinct. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163/69 "2008-11-12T16:29:44Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > It’s a silly thing to say, but it seems perfectly in keeping with the logic given - that’s why we need to know the reason behind it. It’s a silly thing to say, therefore the logic is silly. Therefore, why bother understanding the “reason” behind something so silly? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-a-placenta-human-life/472163.md?page=3)