‘Subpersonal’ — rebirth of terrifying notion from last century

IN HIS letter (November 17), Con Hayes presents a well-argued case for permitting the killing of human beings at various stages of development. However, in my opinion there are several flaws in his argument:

1. He calls the coming into being of a new human being at conception a belief on the part of Prof William Reville (Letters, November 1). It is, of course, a scientific fact.

2. Mr Hayes bases his whole argument on the idea of personhood rather than human life. Personhood is a notoriously slippery concept and — as his letter makes clear — highly adaptable in the hands of those fortunate enough to have been allowed to reach the stage of deciding the fate of their less fortunate co-humans. As Mr Hayes probably knows, there are modern philosophers who believe it is permissible to kill newborn babies, especially if they are handicapped. The eminent British ethicist, Baroness Warnock, suggests that permission be given to “put down” old people who are no longer able to look after themselves. Presumably these human beings are judged as not being, or as having ceased to be, persons in any meaningful sense.