"... The text does not convey a sense or possibility of a fetus’ being-born-alive. The Hebrew term יצא conveys a sense of “coming out” (depart). From the casuistic law form of Laws of Hammurabi 209–214 and MAL 50–52, the general trend of law forms indicates miscarriage throughout the laws, for instance, the Laws of Hammurabi 209: “if an awilu strikes a woman of the awilu class and thereby causes her to miscarry her fetus…”. If we consider relatively poor medical advancement in ancient society, we can assume easily that the possibility of premature birth would be rare. A fetus is not considered as life in SAL as in the Hebrew Bible. Laws of Hammurabi treat miscarriage as an economic accident; thereby it is sufficient to compensate for the loss of a fetus. For example, LH #209 states that an awilu’s miscarriage requires payment of 10 shekels of silver only. MAL #50 also asks for full payment of a life for a fetus. A fetus has economic value in miscarriage. According to this view, the fetus is not yet full life as a person. Then the opposition may arise from an anti-abortion perspective: biblical law can be different from SAL and may treat a fetus as life. But this opposition does not hold true from the Hebrew Bible in general and also from the agricultural village context. In the Hebrew Bible life begins after birth. ..."