The Reading Should Some Lives Be Prevented?

Though the use of pre-natal hereditary screening is as of now utilized as a part of high-hazard pregnancies for recognition of illness, for example, Down syndrome and Huntington 's chorea (Ridley 55, 98). As researchers decide the qualities for extra hereditary conditions, screening of incipient organisms will give more data to potential biological parents, former to their offspring has advanced. On the off chance that a screened embryo were found to convey qualities for a specific malady or inability, its guardians may specifically prematurely end it. This gives parents a choice of raising a child with a disability or back out if they don’t have the means to support the child financially, physically, emotionally or mentally. This is a good thing despite what others say because if a child is born with a disability in to family that doesn’t have the means to support it, it is unfair to all parties

* Justice - concerns the distribution of scarce health resources, and the decision of who gets what treatment (fairness and equality).

The fetus has a valuable future, just as we consider children, the retarded or mentally ill to have valuable futures, thus killing a fetus is not morally permissible. Another pro-choice argument is that the fetus has no desire to live and consequently there is no wrongness in killing. Marquis criticizes this viewpoint, as society believes it is morally wrong to kill those who have no desire to live, and those who are unconscious or suicidal (Gedge & Waluchow, 2012, p220).

According to Simon Jenkins, a writer for the British newspaper The Guardian, states that “there cannot be a human freedom so personal as ordering the circumstances of one's own death...[yet]... the near universal desire ‘to be allowed to die in my own home’ is willfully disregarded” (Jenkins 1). By allowing yourself to have life, one would assume that this gives you freedom over other aspects of your existence, including when it should end. By denying the rights to achieve liberty, achieve happiness, and define our lives, are we not denying the rights governments around the world were founded on? It is the denial of these rights that allows the mental stress felt by patients to turn into physical pain.

Marquis contends that abortion is impermissible, he expresses that executing adults isn't right since it treacherously denies them from their potential future and fetus removal is denying the fetus of their future, in this manner fetus removal is impermissible. "The loss of one's life is one of the best misfortunes one can endure." (p. 367). He goes one to state, that it is indecent however there are uncommon situations where it may not be. In agreement to Marquis contention, I trust that abortion is unethical in light of the fact that the baby can possibly be a feasible piece of society, the embryo is a living individual, has a privilege to life.

I appreciate all your thoughts and comments. It is very heart-warming to see how compassionate you are on this subject. Last week, I was listening to a talk radio from CBC: “He didn't want to die. But he didn't want to live with Huntington's more”[1]. According to Erin Schreurs, whose husband suffered from Huntington’s, he had to travel to Switzerland to seek a dignified death. According to Erin, despite raising hopes with Canada’s new physician-assisted suicide legislation, they found out that Huntington’s is not recognized as a disease with a reasonably foreseeable death. Unlike Heather and Catherine, I have never been in direct contact with people who suffer from terminal illnesses, but listening to Erin’s walking through what has happened

The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a timely and dignified death bears the sanction of history and is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.

A patient could feel that it is unfair to be denied what they believe their right to die is. There are additional issues that a patient could experience along with the loss of their health. There is the loss of privacy, pride, and dignity when unable to care for self.

However, as time went on, several problems arose which had to do with the principle of justice in healthcare. In America, it is the accepted norm that it is unjust to treat one person better or worse than another person, in similar circumstances (Tong, 2007, p.29). In an attempt

Columnist Micheal Gerson argues in his article "The Value of a Human Life" that the value of a human life should outweigh the choice of simply taking it, no matter how "flawed" the person is. When it comes to a being a "defective" person, a "qualification can turn into a justification" when it comes to authorizing assisted suicide. In other words, deciding to kill oneself depends heavily on society putting pressure on people with a disability or illness by giving them the notion that they are no longer useful and, therefore, "wasting space". If a person is plagued by some mental or physical illness, it is accepted, maybe even expected of them, to commit suicide; yet, it is still frowned upon if a person considered "normal" would take the same action against himself. Instead, the author calls his readers to change the mantra of society and, instead of turning our backs, help the vulnerable through their darkest times, letting them know that their lives ARE worth the

Abortion is one of the most controversial topics of all times. The definition most people associate with abortion is the termination of unwanted pregnancy. In their essay, “The Wrong of Abortion”, Patrick Lee and Robert P. George argue that intentional abortion is unjust and therefore objectively immoral no matter the circumstances. Also, they argue that “the burden of carrying the baby is significantly less than the harm the baby would suffer by being killed; the mother and father have a special responsibility to the child; it follows that intentional abortion (even in few cases where the baby’s death is an unintended but foreseen side effect) is unjust ” (24).

To conclude, I believe that abortion should only be considered concerning the best interest of the foetus because that is what is seen to be ethically right (by ending the possibility of suffering and low quality of life that the foetus may have to endure if it was to be born). Situation Ethics, devised by Joseph Fletcher could be a religious stance as to why the allowance of abortion for disabled foetuses may be in accordance to religious principles also. For example, dependent on the severity of a disability of a foetus, it might be reasonable to suggest aborting a foetus because it would be the most loving thing to do. Agape love, the kind of love Jesus had for everyone in which this theory teaches us to practice.

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.

Abortion may be one of the most ongoing disagreements throughout time, some may consider this act as wrong such as specified in this quote by Mother Teresa: “The greatest destroyer of peace is abortion because if a mother can kill her own child, what is left for me to kill you and you to kill me? There is nothing between.” Abortion not only murders an unborn child, causes guilt for the mother’s decision to end her pregnancy and may cause problems to the mother’s health; abortion is irreversible that child will not have life. Some women having an abortion can suffer from damage to the uterus, internal bleeding including having pieces of the baby left inside her body causing difficulties. By means of ending the pregnancy, the mother may

Abortion is a highly-debated topic of whether it is ethical for a woman to decide to have one. Abortion is any of various surgical methods for deliberately terminating a pregnancy. When we speak of abortion today, we mean induced abortion performed by trained doctors, not including miscarriage (MacKinnon & Fiala, 2015). Some current methods of abortion are morning-after pill, mifepristone, uterine or vacuum aspiration, dilation and curettage, saline solution, prostaglandin drugs, hysterotomy, and partial birth abortion. Abortion involves questions about rights, happiness, and well-being, as well as the status and value of human life. The people who think it is ethical to have an abortion stand on the Pro-choice side and the people who think it is unethical stand on the Pro-life side. The liberal view of abortion supports abortions and the conservative view opposes abortion. There are many legal, religious, and medical conflicts that are included in the debate over abortion. The arguments made from both sides help us better understand whether a woman should have an abortion.