Deontological Approach To Abortion Essay

In this paper I am going to critically evaluate “A Defense of Abortion” by Judith Thompson, a moral philosopher and metaphysician, who argues that is morally okay to abort a fetus even if the fetus is considered a person and contrast it to another moral philosopher and utilitarian, Peter Singer who deems her argument to be flawed.

One of the most frequently debated topics in bioethics is the morality of abortion, or the ending of a pregnancy without physically giving birth to an infant. Often times abortions are categorized into either spontaneous, a natural miscarriage; induced or intentional, which is premeditated and for any reason; or therapeutic, which albeit intentional, its sole purpose is to save the mother’s life. It seems however that moral conflicts on issue mainly arise when discussing induced abortions. In general, people universally agree it is morally wrong to kill an innocent person and in some people’s eyes induced abortions are the intentional killings of innocent persons, thus making them immoral. However not all individuals view fetuses as persons and consequentially argue it is not morally wrong to kill them.

defends that abortion is a morally sound action. Don Marquis, in his essay An Argument that Abortion is Wrong, takes the opposite stance. He claims “that abortion, except perhaps in rare instances, is seriously wrong”.

Abortion is when a pregnancy is ended by emptying the contents of the womb. An abortion is usually the result of an unwanted pregnancy and is performed in a hospital or an Abortion clinic.

Women may have an abortion for a variety of reasons, but in general they choose abortion because a pregnancy at that time is in some way wrong for them. “Abortion is the removal of a fetus from the uterus before it is mature enough to live on its own” (Kuechler 1996). When this happens spontaneously we call it a miscarriage. Induced abortion is brought about deliberately by a medical procedure that ends pregnancy. Legal abortion, carried out by trained medical practitioners, is one of the most common and safest surgical procedures. “About 1.5 million American women choose to have induced abortions each year. Less than 1% of all abortion patients experience a major complication associated with the procedure” (Kuechler 1996).

To put it simply, an abortion is defined as, the intentional termination of a pregnancy most often preformed before the third trimester (within weeks 1-28). The controversy over abortions usually stems from the difficulty between individuals to agree on a set of conditions that would constitute ones’ decision, to abort as just. This issue is examined by many philosophers, particularly, Judith Thomson and Don Marquis. Both philosopher’s views loosely encompass the complex underlying beliefs of those who stand behind the “pro-life” and “pro-choice” arguments. Tomson and Marquis demonstrate the very distinctively different perspectives one could take on the issue. Don Marquis suggests that fetuses, being persons, possess the right to a “future like ours” and that it would be wrong to intentionally impede on “the life that I would have lived if I had lived out my natural lifespan” except for in “rare circumstances”. While, Tomson asserts that not all abortions are morally wrong, nor do they “violate the victim’s right to life”, and by having one that is in no way indicative that a fetus’s rights have been violated. Despite the fact that both philosophers present valid positions, and outline their key differences, Tomson goes far beyond Marquis’ efforts by illustrating that the way in which we view abortions ought to be redefined in order for one to maintain a clear perspective.

In Don Marquis’ essay, his goal is to argue that abortion is completely wrong. His main thesis can be summarized through one line; “Abortion, except perhaps in rare instances, is seriously wrong” (Marquis, 192). He addresses the idea that

The issue of abortion is one of the most sensitive and controversial issues faced by modern societies. This issue leads to topics of whether abortion is right or wrong, if it is the actual killing of a person, and what actually defines the moral status of a fetus. In this paper, I will be arguing against Bonnie Steinbock, who believes that abortions are morally acceptable. So I will be supporting the view that abortions are not morally acceptable.

The debate about abortion focuses on two issues; 1.) Whether the human fetus has the right to life, and, if so, 2.) Whether the rights of the mother override the rights of the fetus. The two ethicists who present strong arguments for their position, and who I am further going to discuss are that of Don Marquis and Judith Thomson. Marquis' "Future Like Ours" (FLO) theory represents his main argument, whereas, Thomson uses analogies to influence the reader of her point of view. Each argument contains strengths and weaknesses, and the point of this paper is to show you that Marquis presents a more sound argument against abortion than Thomson presents for it. An in depth overview of both arguments will be

Don Marquis starts off his essay stating that most anti-abortion arguments are often thought of as of “irrational religious dogma or a conclusion generated by seriously confused philosophical argument.” (Marquis, p 183). He goes on to say that his essay will show abortion is seriously immoral and in the same moral category as killing an innocent adult human. Marquis then deconstructs typical arguments made both for and against abortion. He disagrees with the common arguments made by the anti-abortionist because the moral principles they use are often too broad in scope. Marquis draws parallels between the typical anti-abortionist arguments and the standard pro-choice arguments. For example, he notes the anti-abortionist will often make the claim that life is present at conception or the fetus looks like a baby and therefore it is a human being with a right to life. Regarding the pro-choice arguments Marquis notices similar arguments in the other direction. For example, the pro-choicer will claim the fetuses are not persons. Marquis notices there is too much ambiguity in the arguments of both sides. Marquis says that the moral claims made by each party do not do a good job touching the essence of the matter. Marquis then goes on to state that in order to understand why abortion is wrong we must first find out why it is wrong to kill us. He arrives at the conclusion that it is wrong to kill us because it deprives us our future. Marquis argues that since a standard fetus has a future just like a child or an adult

Deontology considers an action to be right iff it is in accordance with a moral rule or principle. A deontological moral rule is one that (i) is laid on us by god, (ii) is required by natural law, (iii) is laid on us by reason, (iiii) is required by nationality, (iiiii) would command universal rational acceptance, and (iiiiii) would be the object of choice of all rational beings (Hursthouse, Virtue Theory and Abortion, 224). This provides the link between right action, moral rule, and rationality. The deontologist Don Marquis would respond to the utilitarian argument by suggesting that the consequences of abortion are irrelevant because abortion violates a fundamental and unconditional duty.

The first ethical issue will be right to life and abortion. Abortion remains controversial and a highly debated subject. The ethical debate concerning abortion is the considerations of a woman’s autonomy and the rights of the woman and the unborn child. The parent/ child relationship and assessing the best interests of potential children also provide considerable scope for ethical discussion. (Jones K, Chaloner C 2007). A factor in the ethical future of abortion is the perception of morality, or of actively ending the life of an unborn human being. This process of deductive reasoning explains the most common anti-abortion argument: First, the fetus is an innocent human being. Second, it is morally wrong to kill an innocent human being and lastly, it is morally wrong to kill a fetus. This reasoning can also be applied to support a viewpoint to those who support abortion. First the fetus has no moral status. Secondly, it is not morally wrong to destroy that which has no moral status. Lastly, it is not morally wrong to destroy a fetus.

Don Marquis spearheads the potentiality argument in his essay on the immorality of abortion (Study Guide, pp. 167-73), claiming that it is impermissible because it deprives the foetus of a “future like ours,” and is consequently morally on par with killing a healthy adult (Study Guide, p. 170). Despite Marquis’ claims that his argument combines the best aspects of the personhood and sanctity of life ideas to produce a superior ethical theory on the immorality of abortion (Study Guide, p. 170), his argument features many flaws, including seemingly ad hoc explanations to avoid speciesism (Study Guide, p. 169) and exclude contraception (Study Guide, p. 173), and, most prominently, ill-defined terminology. His entire argument centers on the value of a “future like ours” and yet he fails to define what exact quality makes such a potential future valuable, giving only a vague indication that it is somehow different to personhood. The vagueness of what is essentially the key to his entire theory makes it difficult to accurately dispute his claims, yet he concedes himself that his theory is simply an indirect and unconvincing way of reaching the same conclusion as the personhood argument (Study Guide, p.171). His conclusions are in essences the same as those drawn from the personhood argument, it argues that foetuses should be granted legal personhood based on

Ethics can be defined as a set of principles which dictate what is considered as morally ‘good’ and ‘bad’. Abortion is defined as the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy through a medical procedure which results in the death of a fetus. Within ethics, there are many arguments as to whether abortion should be permitted in society as many regard it as an act of murder and others simply see it as a decision that should be given to the mother only. The issue of abortion remains to be one of the most controversial topics in society, which causes an inevitable clash of opinion. Through the exploration of philosophical principles, we are able to evaluate the origins of such opinions. In the same way, utilitarianism equates wrongness or blameworthiness of an action with its resultant pain or unhappiness. The central principle of utilitarianism expresses the belief that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. Since utilitarianism differentiates ethical and unethical actions on the basis of the outcomes of those actions, it falls into the consequentialist class. With this belief, utilitarianism challenged traditional views that abortion was an 'evil ' act, arguing instead that the end justifies the means. In contrast, the deontologist would consider the intent of the person seeking an abortion in evaluating its ethical standing. In addition to this, postmodernism argues that, since there is

Marquis additionally augmented a practical objection to his claim. The disagreement concerns of contraception. Contraception falls into the same category of the deprivation of the future of a will be human being. Marquis said “… by insisting that contraception deprives the combination of sperm and ovum separately of a valuable future like ours…, too many futures are lost”. Therefore, contraception is also immoral. He defended with pointed out the contradiction of fertilized eggs and the un-joined of sperm and ovum that “…there is no actual subject harm…” In Marquis’s discussion, if adults have a right to live, therefore potential human being would have warranted the same equity, hence premature stage of abortion is immoral. In future-like-ours concept that actual being with potential has a right, not those possible