Moral And Legal Implications Of Abortion

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.

Jonathan Glover, in his article Matters of Life and Death casts dispersions on both pro-abortion and anti-abortion debates citing them as too knee-jerk emotional reactions diminishing the inherent complexity of the other side (1. Glover, CC2006, p. 0110). Glover comprehensively addresses the key points of both sides of the abortion debate and evaluates their inherent virtues, especially for those who hold these opinions, then methodically points out its flaws. Ultimately, Glover comes to the conclusion that though a fetus is a human at the moment of conception, the right to abort lies with the mother and her own self-determination.

Abortion has been a highly debated topic for many years. Until 1973, when abortion was legalized in the U.S., women were obtaining very dangerous abortions that often killed them in the process. Although abortion is legal now, members of society still do not agree on whether it is “right.” There are pros and cons of abortion, which can be examined by the three theoretical perspectives; Structural Functionalism, Conflict Theory, and Postmodern Theory. This essay explains what the three theoretical perspectives are and how they view the social issue of abortion.

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.

There are many common pregnancy alternatives, but most often the resulting decision is abortion because it is effortless. Abortion is endings a women’s pregnancy by removing or forcing a fetus or embryo from the mother’s womb before it is able to survive on its own. Not all abortions are purposely done some are spontaneous like when a women that has a miscarriage. Rather abortion is done purposely or naturally it is a worldwide complication as to it being wrong or right. Abortion is an ethical issue that will be analyzed according to a personal worldview and Christian worldview. Ethical thinking will be examined by value-based decisions that address abortion from the perspective of a Christian worldview and comparing it to a personal assumption by addressing ethical dilemma, core beliefs, resolution, evaluation, and comparison.

In this essay, the morality of the abortion of a fetus will be discussed in a drama involving a married couple named Deb and Derek (Smolkin, Bourgeois & Findler, 2010). For clarification purposes, we must first define the topic of this discussion; abortion is defined as the act in which a female voluntarily terminates her pregnancy where this act is legally permitted (Warren, 1973). Deb who is 16 weeks pregnant discovers that the fetus she is carrying will most likely be born mentally challenged (Smolkin et al., 2010). As the drama unfolds, the couple ponders the negative impact this child will have on their business, marriage as well as the quality of life that their child will experience if it is carried to term (Smolkin

Abortion and the morality of it has been a hot topic for years in the United States although it has been carried out for centuries in different cultures. Abortion is a medical procedure deliberately terminating a pregnancy. Abortions usually happen within the first 28 weeks of pregnancy and are considered an outpatient procedure. The first abortion laws were passed by Britain in 1803 and by 1880 most abortions in the U.S. were illegal, except for those that were performed to save the life of a woman. This exception to the rule gives insight into the battle that exists today and the ethical debate of abortion.

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.

Prior to the landmark case of Roe vs. Wade, abortion was legal in the United States under common law and with several stipulations. It was legal under the advice of medical personnel or in the attempt to save a mother’s life. Though abortion were widely available it was considered a secretive and “back alley” procedure that threatened the life of the patient and the persons conducting the abortion. In 1965, illegal abortions made up one-sixth of all pregnancy- and childbirth-related deaths. A survey conducted between 1965 and 1967 found that 8 in 10 low-income women in New York City who had an abortion attempted a dangerous self-induced procedure (planedparenthood.com).

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.

“On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion”, an essay written by Mary Anne Warren, defend abortion in any stage of a woman’s pregnancy (pg 468). Warren argues that the potential to become a human being is not the same as being human and deserving the same right to life (pg. 468-472). This essay asserts that in order to be human, one must possess five particular traits (pg. 470). These trait are consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, the ability to communicate, and awareness of oneself (pg. 470). Warren claims that since a fetus has not yet acquired all of the traits, then that fetus is not human and therefore does not have the right to life (pg. 470).

My wife and I are against abortion. But if a pregnant woman wants to end her unplanned pregnancy, for health or economic reasons, this is between her and God and between her and the law of the land. It’s nobody else’s business. I don’t understand why this will anger somebody to the extent of committing murder! In the United States, 60 percent of pregnancies are unplanned.

The ideological bent of the state’s message is further shown by the statute’s use of what can be described as “loaded” language. The statute refers not to a “fetus” or an “embryo,” but to a “child,” despite the fact that “child” is not the medically appropriate term for a fetus too young to survive outside the womb. While one might argue that this is mere semantics, it is fair to say that much of the political debate surrounding abortion access is fought over semantics—that “the morality of abortion [turns on] whether a fetus is a person . . . .” Because of the critical nature of the language involved, requiring physicians to use language such as “child” is meaningful. Describing the use of similar language in a South Dakota speech-and-display

Our society is filled with numerous ethical dilemmas. We are consistently bombarded with ethical issues daily. At times, these ethical dilemmas are virtually impossible to unravel. I believe the topic of abortion is one of the most difficult and controversial issues in today’s society. It is also the one people are most passionate about as it continues to be scrutinized by two groups, holding fast to different perspectives; Pro-Life versus Pro-Choice.