In class on Monday, I brought up this movie that I remembered as "From Conception to Birth," but which (after some Googling) is actually called "The Miracle of Life." The 1983 film, part of PBS' Nova series, was the first to document the progress of a new human from conception to birth.
My mom showed my sister and me this documentary when I was little, probably 7 or 8. I don't remember too many specifics, but I recall being mesmerized by it. Seeing something with my own eyes that was invisible, and that I understood poorly, was pretty amazing. Human reproduction is such a mystery for little kids (and even for adults!); I think it was a great movie for my sister and I to watch as children.
While it's definitely a groundbreaking and beautiful documentary, "The Miracle of Life" confuses me a little bit. Clearly, its achievement was good for the progress of scientific photography. And its images of un-seeable things like sperm fertilizing the egg, or the embryo becoming a fetus, are amazing. And it's a great educational tool to teach people about their own reproduction.
But what about the parents who agreed to document this? I don't know if they were getting paid, but it seems odd to allow a team of scientific photographers to document your pregnancy from the inside out - and to videotape the birth! To me, it would be too invasive. Isn't medical photography always kind of invasive though, in the most literal sense? Do you guys think you would agree to allow something so personal to be publicized and videotaped in the name of science?
No comments:
Post a Comment