Abortion - a very pregnant topic, indeed. And yes, I just used some tasteful baby humour while delivering the opening statement into a personal essay about (as some would say) baby-killing. Now, I don’t mean to suck up all the fun like some type of vacuum (I will stop now), but abortion is a very grave issue for many women all over the world. I understand the trepidation behind passing legislation on the life of a potential human being, but therein lies the problem: in regards to when an embryo becomes a person and how that would apply to the morality of abortion, a fetus shouldn’t be considered a fully-fledged human being with a name and a purpose until it has popped out of an ungodly, stretched vagina or been brutally sawed out of a uterus via Caesarian. Many would argue the contrary, and they wouldn’t technically be wrong. Who am I to say when a fetus becomes a baby person? Now, here’s where I experience an excruciating level of cognitive dissonance. My personal opinion on the matter of terminating a pregnancy is that by the third trimester, a preemie baby could be born without many complications; this woman has had half a year to weigh her options and to consider the possible outcomes of carrying her pregnancy to term; this embryo-fetus-mound-of-multiplying-cells-thing has gestated long enough to have little tiny fingers and toes and eyes and a nose and a brain. I do NOT think, at this point, that abortion should still be an option, unless there were unforeseen
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
It is worth mentioning in the first place that the continuing debate over the abortion problem has always been based on two main opposing views. Nagan (1971) terms these viewpoints as “the fetus oriented view and the female perspective” (p. 288). To his mind, defining the status of the fetus as a human being or only as a potential human being best indicates polarity
The debate about the legality of abortion involves debating the legal status of the fetus. If the fetus is a person, anti-choice activists argue, then abortion is murder and should be illegal. Even if the fetus is a person, though, abortion may have justified as necessary to women’s body self-govern but that wouldn’t mean that abortion is automatically ethical. Perhaps the state can’t force women to carry pregnancies to term, but it could argue that it is the most ethical choice.
However, the question frequently comes about regarding at which point of fetal development can the fetus be given “personhood.” The standard pro-life argument asserts the claim that life is present from the point of conception; a fetus possess similar physical characteristics to that of an infant such as a genetic codes that are necessary and sufficient conditions for being human, making the claims of abortion morally akin to murder. Mary Anne Warren and Judith Jarvis Thomson provide a pro-abortion argument, asserting that abortions do not take
Much of the ethical debate stemming from this topic lies with the issue of personhood. Personhood is a concept that defines what is it is that makes a person a “person”. There is no established criteria for this concept and it can vary depending on one’s belief. Patil, Dode & Ahirrao (2014), argue that the concept of personhood is the bridge that connects the fetus with the right to life. If one considers the fetus a person then ethically abortion is wrong. If the fetus is not a person then abortion is ethically acceptable. The issue on personhood mirrors the subjectivity of abortion debate.
The public debate over abortion in the United States has intensified since the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade. Advocates on each side of the debate often hint that we must select between two stark options: “Pro-life” and “Pro-choice.” Strong pro-life advocates claim that abortion is immoral (except perhaps in a few cases) because the fetus is a human being from the
“A Defense of Abortion” by Judith Jarvis Thomson, examines and provides a perspective on the debate over abortion. Thomson begins her paper providing the slippery slope argument made by pro-life and pro-choice supporters. The primary statement for both parties deal with the identification of the fetus as a human. Pro-life supporters argue that the fetus is a human from conception, and disagree that a line drawn should not be drawn for which human life begins within the time frame of the pregnancy. Pro-choice supporters believe that at conception the fertilized ovum is only a cluster of cells and should not be considered a human life.
One of the most important philosophical issues ever concerns the definition of a person and who is able to feel. Abortion, which is a deliberate termination of pregnancy, is one of the most important practical applications of that issue. Life on Earth is threatened with destruction from overpopulation and the poverty that overpopulation causes. Fortunately, abortion can prevent overpopulation. The question about whether abortion should be done is primarily the question about whether the embryo or fetus is a person. In most cases, the embryo weighs less than 100grams: less than 10% of human brain. Abortion should be legal since it is useful and since humans become conscious after birth, not before.
The creation of human life is an extraordinary system of cells combined to make a single individual, unique and beautiful. The only concern is closing the doors to a modern day holocaust. The nation might be blinded, but convincing others who are less human, do not have the same rights to life as you and I? Whether it is a zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus it is still a human being no matter how far along in pregnancy the fetus has rights; evoking uprising controversy of fetal rights debates that have been working up through society, such as pro-life and pro-choice; a fetus is a person that has right just like a full-born human.
This hypothetical situation could be a vision of tomorrow. For decades, the controversial topic of abortion has been the center of countless heated debates. Abortion, or the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, commonly sparks disputes over its morality. Those who are pro-life believe that terminating a pregnancy is essentially killing an unborn child, and unethical act that must be banned. However, some do not realize that under certain circumstances, carrying a child to term is just not an option.
One social issue that divides our nation unlike any other issue today, is that of the moral and legal status of a fetus, and the question of whether or not abortions is morally permissible. In this essay the focus will not be on the morality of abortion as a whole, but rather on whether it is right or wrong to draw a line for when it is okay or not okay to have an abortion. Personally I feel that no one has the ability or right to accurately draw a line of when a fetus becomes a person.
The personhood of the fetus is an important determinant of the ethicality of abortion. Some people regard the fetus as being a person, and because of this, they say that abortion is comparable to murder. Others view the fetus as being an extension of the female body, and because of this, they say that it has no rights, and that women should have the autonomy to get rid of this unwanted extension.
Abortion is always argued with different cases and play a main role in medical ethics (blackwell.,p291).It is evidently reasonable for some to argue that in moral situation, abortion is a murder and it should be illegal, while others may claim that abortion is woman’s right when concerning on autonomy ( The abortion debate in Australia). Opponents of making abortion legal claim that abortion is a kind of murder on extend of moral situation. It is always regarded as a sin to kill a person who is no aggressor in most moral communities (new ethics 1). Fetus is a biologically human as it is not just a part of the mothers, such as a lung or a kidney. On the contrary, it is obvious that fetus is human due to he or she has genetic code of human and human parents as well (abortion myth p5). Moreover, it has potentiality to be a person with primary moral worth (text book p210-211). As Gillion (new ethics) pointed out, every person has his right to life, especially he is not an aggressor. This point is also been pointed by (Rebecca and john,Blackwell p204), “embryos has a right to life” .The fetus is innocent and
I will be discussing the distinctive circumstances of gestation and how it can be used to decide if abortion is morally or immoral. There’s is nothing wrong with killing a fetus or embryo as these processes only violates the process of the embryos and early fetuses, not of that of a human being. The fetus exist because of the mother but the mother doesn’t make the fetus life any worse off in anyway by deciding not to keep the pregnancy.
So, the arguments and questions surrounding this topic are: Should abortion be legal? Is it simply the mother’s choice? Does the father need to be on board with the plan? And obviously so many more. My belief is that the baby needs to be put first. And I’m not saying that the mother has no right, but as a mother all you want is what’s best for your baby and how is killing it the answer. I know, some mothers aren’t ready to take on the task of raising another life but that is why there is adoption. As I’m sure it would be one of the hardest things to give your baby away, don’t you think that is better than just killing him/her? At the stage of pregnancy where abortion is legal, the baby is a fetus. I absolutely hate that word, because it’s a baby, another living thing that is growing inside of you. I understand there is a different scenario for every different baby being born. Some mothers, have a loving and supporting family surrounding her, others do not. Some mothers have a spouse beside them, cherishing every moment of this journey together, others do not. And I feel absolutely heartbroken for those mothers who feel that they have no one to rely