To sum it up, the concept of "potentially viable" may only be applied to the the natural womb -- like you said. However, a fetus at the same gestational stage in the hypothetical artifical womb would be considered "viable", even tho, in reality it is "potentially viable". In both scenarios, the fetus would have to "reach viability".
Yeah I hear you believe that VIABILITY in concept applies only to the gestating fetus. I hear you believe it has no practicality being applied to a micropreemie or other premature newborns; even those who don't survive.<quoted text>
I don't think there's anything we disagree on here. The bottom line here is that outside of the concept of the not yet plausible "artificial womb" the concept of "reaching viability" with medical assistance, outside the natural womb, is impossible.
Hear that Kate ?
To me it seems like you're splitting hairs just for the sake of splitting hair. Or being contentious just for the sake of being contentious.
I maintain, a fetus determined to be viable who is delivered and attached to ALS, but dies anyway, was obviously not viable. It was unable to survive outside the womb.
Back to splitting hair -- I have interchanged VIABLE and SURVIVE throughout this yearS long discussion/disagreement. I do not believe it's been wrong to do so.
Limit of Viability