What happens if someone intentionally shoots a person (not in self defense) and that person subsequently dies six days later from their injuries? I think the charge would be murder. The fact that it was only “attempted murder” for six days would be irrelevant, right?
From a moral and ethical perspective, a person was killed. However, previously illogical and immoral rulings on abortion created this mess. Anyone with a lick of sense (or morality) should understand that children—even unborn ones—deserve protection. Sadly, a woman’s right to choose to murder her child is deemed supreme in this mixed up mess of a country!
Under the current illogical and immoral logic of legal "personhood," this case is a bit different from your example. In your example, a "person" was shot, and then six days later the "person" died from his or her injuries. The fact that there was a delay between the criminal act (shooting) and the result (death) does not negate the crime; in fact, there are cases of murder charges being brought decades after the fact, where a death was determined to have been caused by a long-ago criminal act (for example, if someone is shot, and then decades later a bullet fragment breaks free and causes death).
In this case, the difference is that, legally-speaking, a "non-person" was injured, then became a "person," and then the "person" died.
(the absurdity of the above sentence should just go to further show the illogic and immorality of the current state of "personhood" law).