Abortion on Other Lavel

Abortion is a controversial topic regarding the rights mainly of the fetus and the mother. Men’s rights and involvement are generally overlooked in the abortion process. Since females are the carriers of the embryo, most of the time the male’s input is not incorporated into the final decision. There are several debates regarding abortion and whose choice it should be to terminate the fetus. Every father has different expectations in a pregnancy and how much their decision should be included in the abortion depends solely on their involvement in the mother and embryo’s life. When the female deliberately engages in sexual intercourse, it becomes her responsibility to allow the fetus a right to her body and to include the father’s input. If

There are many factors that are taken into consideration when determining if abortion is morally permissible, or wrong including; sentience of the fetus, the fetuses right to life, the difference between adult human beings and fetuses, the autonomy of the pregnant woman, and the legality of abortion. Don Marquis argues that abortion is always morally wrong, excluding cases in which the woman is threatened by pregnancy, or abortion after rape, because fetuses have a valuable future. Mary Anne Warren contends that late term abortions are morally permissible because birth is the most significant event for a fetus, and a woman’s autonomy should never be suspended.

One of the first moral issues addressed by both sides of the abortion debate concerns a pregnant woman’s so-called natural “right” to make “reproductive choices.” (“The Rights of Pregnant Women”) Anti-abortion advocacy groups claim that “the only way to actually protect the mother’s rights will be by enforcing laws that secure her child’s right to life,” (“Argument 2”) whereas pro-abortion groups contend that these laws “create a dangerous precedent for wide-ranging government intrusion into the lives of all women.” (“The Rights”) With two fundamentally contrasting viewpoints at odds with each other, it is apparent that one of the core issues concurrent with abortion is a woman’s rights versus the rights of her unborn fetus.

When the beginning of life actually occurs is clearly not a topic to be taken lightly in today’s modern world. Majority of the population’s answers to this question are based on each individuals opinion and is supported by what they believe. In general, there are two sides of the argument. One is that life begins at the time of conception. The other belief is that life doesn’t begin until the drawing of the first breath. The true dilemma here is not the accurate pinpointing of life’s beginning, but the questions that accompany this topic and each individuals desire to do the right thing, the moral thing. While one point of view allows for abortion the other does not. The issue raises many questions of morality. Is abortion moral? When does it become murder? When is it permissible? (Life of the mother at stake / A product of rape). Should it be the mother’s choice? Many arguments for both sides pull from scripture and scientific articulations.

Morality and Duties: There are many reasons women choose to seek an abortion but “one of the most common reasons is that they do not have room in their life just then to be a mother, [and] they know if they continue the pregnancy they will not be able to give it up” (p. 312). Little strongly believes that this is a “perfectly sensible, and often wise,” decision (p. 312). Before morally judging a woman based on her decision, one must learn to “appreciate the different moral contours involved with entering, existing in and exiting a relationship” (p. 312). A woman’s morals cannot be judged given she “may have good reason to decline,” gestation — for example a woman can argue that her reason is “more [of] a refusal to create than a decision to destroy” (p. 30). It must be recognized that “ [being] asked

While parts of both may be true, both cannot stand side by side as completely true when discussing abortion. As they stand today, fetus rights and female rights are incompatible in arena of abortion. Even the “other side” agrees that the two cannot stand shoulder to shoulder. In a chapter entitled “Abortion Does Not Violate Human Rights”, Christian Beenfeldt quotes Brian McKinely when claiming that female rights have a higher precedence than fetus rights: “It’s actually quite simple. You cannot have two entities with equal rights occupying one body. One will automatically have veto power over the other.” So one question remains, which more important, fetus rights or female rights? The winner of this question can be decided by one simple factor: is the fetus to be considered a true, living human being at the point of conception, or does true human life not begin until after birth? A clarification should be made here, however. In this paper it will be assumed that everyone involved in this debate considers a newborn child to be a human being. That is, at the moment of birth, a child either becomes a human being or continues to be a human being; regardless of the fetus’s life state before birth, it will be assumed that all agree that birth “confirms”, so to speak, the life and human existence of the newborn.

Each person, man or woman has a right to their own body. A woman has a right to dictate what happens to her own body and the right of self-preservation. Judith Jarvis Thomson stated that “Some [anti-abortionists] won’t even make an exception for a case in which continuation of the pregnancy is likely to shorten the mother’s life; they regard abortion as impermissible even to save the mother’s life” (Thomson, 2013, p. 298). These anti-abortionists renounce abortion even if it threatens the life of the woman, they see more value in the fetus than the woman.

The ongoing dispute of abortion has condemned the idea of women aborting their unborn child. Whether it be lack of support, critical physical or mental health, rape, or not being ready for such responsibility - all women have a reason for having an abortion. Therefore, women should have the free will to do what proves necessary and beneficial to themselves and their pregnancy.

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.

Women that do not want to birth an embryo and have acquired pregnancy from a partner that does may cause the father to argue and convince the mother to use her body to carry his fetus to term. A great example of the fetus only being the male’s interest and pregnancy being the result from both partners engaging in sexual acts to produce an offspring is stated in the Decision To Abort article. The Decision To Abort article states, “Steve did pursue his interests in sex, companionship, and procreation in morally legitimate ways. In fact, this fetus is the object and result of his pursuit of these interests. Thus, this fetus is a legitimate object of Steve's concern and hence is his and only his. Given this, if Michelle destroys this fetus without his consent, she will cause Steve a wrongful harm. Specifically, she will harm Steve by interfering with his interest in procreation. Moreover, in so far as this fetus is just Steve's, he alone gets to decide on the issue of abortion” (Hanrahan 29). When a man is pursuing his interest in sexual acts to produce a child, the embryo created is his top priority and if the mother destroys his top priority without his consent, it effects the father significantly. Communication plays a huge role in whether or not the men’s input will be accepted by the biological mother in the decision of abortion.

Whether or not abortion is permissible has held controversy for several years. Many people believe it is impermissible to have an abortion because the fetus is a person, therefore, it is murder. Judith Thomson proposes that abortion is permissible. With both sides, there comes several different objections. I will argue against Thomson’s argument that abortion is permissible and show that it is, in fact, impermissible.

When faced with the choice of life or death, most people would choose to live. In fact, most would not want someone else making that decision for them. They would claim that as a living and independent entity it is solely their choice as to whether they continue to live or not. While this concept may seem fairly straightforward, there seems to be some great debate when it is applied to abortion. For many, they will maintain that the fetus has the right to life no matter the situation. There are some who will argue that abortion is morally permissible in specific circumstances and there are even those that will claim that abortion is always permissible. Why is there such a great divide? A major factor that plays a part in this is whether abortion involves more than one life. Because determining the beginning point of life is such a complex and emotional debate, there will be the same allowance in this paper as there was in Judith Jarvis Thomson’s “A Defense of Abortion”. As she eloquently put it “I propose then, that we grant that the fetus is a person from the moment of conception” (p. 721). This will allow for a look into the moral debate of abortion from a more grounded stage. As discussed early in Thomson’s paper, most of the debate on abortion rests on whether the fetus is alive or not. Whereas the focus should be on the many other aspects of pregnancies that may lead to a mother wanting an abortion.

“A living human person begins to exist at the moment of conception, even though only as a cell.” The road to human life may begin at conception, but to call abortion murder is ludicrous and a large exaggeration. Murder is described as the killing of a human being, and an unborn fetus should not be considered a living human being. A fetus is a group of cells that are completely dependent on its mother that cannot live on its own, therefore it should not be considered a human. One of the most popular arguments on the topic of abortion was the supreme court case Roe V. Wade. This case was about a pregnant single women (Roe) challenging the constitutionality of Texas abortion laws. The winning argument in the case Roe v. Wade, states that the “word ‘person’ as used in the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the unborn,” putting this argument to

A long on-going subject that has been greatly debated in our society is abortion. Many people argue that because the baby in the mother’s womb is not alive, aborting him or her is not considered a murder. However, others say that as the baby’s heart and brain are the first things to develop, the baby is technically alive and killing it would be a murder. As soon as the baby has a heartbeat, it has life. Abortion has many characteristics of a murder, including the killing of one human being by another, it’s unethical, and it is done without the consent of the person.

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