Abstract

This article responds to a recent proposal for determining where human life begins on the basis of histological and morphological development of the organism. After examining possible interpretations of the term "human" and relations between "human life," "human being" and "human becoming," I argue that metamorphosis is not a fit analogue for human development. On biological grounds the proposed "metamorphic definition" of "human being" is judged unacceptable.Alternative proposals are then considered, viz., conception, quickening, viability, live birth and personhood. Prom a non- biological standpoint, only the last survives as a candidate for a human being/human becoming boundary. However, every developmental event, including histological and morphological completion of the organism, remains pertinent to moral discourse and decisions concerning human life.