Why Should Sex Selection Abortions Are Morally Permissible?

In Judith Jarvis Thomson’s philosophy paper, A Defense of Abortion, she argues that abortion is permissible because an individual’s right over their own body outweighs a fetus’s right to life. In this paper I will focus on whether or not abortion is always permissible. First, I will present Thomson’s argument which says that abortion is sometimes permissible. I will do so by describing her “famous violinist” thought experiment. Next, I will object to Thomson’s claim and expand the scope of her argument by arguing that abortion is in fact, always permissible. I will do so by presenting a new thought experiment. Finally, I will conclude in saying that Thomson is correct and abortion is in fact only sometimes permissible.

As well all know the abortion rate is increasing dramatically because everyone is becoming impregnated and having abortions for several reasons. In my opinion, I feel as though if you don’t want children then you should practice safe sex by using contraptions. Abortions should be illegal for a numerous amount of reasons which are: It’s consider murder, it’s against religion, it’s unhealthy for the body, and cause mental illness.

Utilitarian’s believe that under certain circumstances an abortion could be justified. For example if the mother doesn’t have the financial means, utilitarian’s would understand living a miserable life would contradict the idea of maximizing happiness to all, including the mother who doesn’t have to carry the financial burden a child would bring to an already bad financial situation. Another case would be if the family knew the baby knows the baby would be brought into this world with a disability, why make him or her suffer (only if the disability could not be cured medically). The thought process for utilitarian’s is that if the child will live a miserable life, why make them live if the abortion could be done before the fetus is even developed into a baby. Utilitarian’s are much more flexible when dealing with an issue such as abortion if the circumstance allows for it and if it maximizes happiness to all, if not most. Therefore an abortion may be decided with the consideration of all in mind.

Abortion is defined as “The deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy.” (Oxford Dictionary). Nearly three out of ten women in the U.S. have an abortion by the time they are 45-years-old (Planned Parenthood). Abortion is morally permissible because an abortion prevents a woman and the potential child’s suffering. Abortion is moral because it is a fundamental right of competent adults to make their own decisions on the course of their medical treatment, can alleviate further suffering in immoral cases, such as rape and is protected by rule of law.

Throughout this semester, our class has discussed the morality of abortion. We have examined different philosophers’ positions on abortion and debated the pros and cons of each article. For my argument, I defined abortion as the deliberate removal of a fetus from the mother’s womb to result in the death of the fetus. My position on abortion was that it is morally permissible depending on if it’s what the mother wants, the child’s future wellbeing, and the circumstances of the pregnancy. After careful thought and consideration, I have changed some parts of my argument and kept others the same.

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.

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.

Although abortion is not stated in the bible, the teaching of it is in there by saying how human life is sacred and humans were created in the image of God. Genesis 1:27 states, “God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them.” The Bible also teaches that children are a blessing. Psalm 127: 3 states, “Truly children are a gift from the Lord; the fruit of the woman is a reward.” God writes, “Thou shalt not kill” in several different places in the bible. These quotes from the Bible back the argument that abortion is wrong. Not only does the Bible show evidence of abortion being wrong, but also abortion causes physical complications to the woman and can affect her ability of future pregnancies. The Centers for Disease Control states that “CDC have received reports of the deaths of 386 women from legal abortion between 1973, when abortion was legalized nationwide, and 2004.” A team in New Zealand analyzed data during a 25-year period and found that abortion in young women has risks of depression, anxiety, suicidal behaviors, and alcohol dependence. The woman’s health is a main factor when it comes to abortion. Rape also plays a big factor in why woman should not have an abortion. I believe that even if a woman is raped, the child still deserves the right to life. The woman has undergone a terrible trauma, but abortion cannot un-rape the woman. To kill the innocent child is

The question of whether or not abortion is morally permissible is widely disputed amongst those who are pro-life or pro-choice. While in some societies abortion has been outlawed, others either entirely allow for it or consider abortion permissible on a case-by-case basis. Many pro-lifers classify abortion as immoral, some even considering it murder. Abortion is typically defined as terminating a pregnancy before the fetus is able to survive outside of the womb. A crucial factor in determining whether or not an instance of abortion can be considered morally permissible is the demarcation of the age of the fetus. Various hard cases in certain societies that have been considered permissible cases for abortion such as: threat of health to the mother, pregnancy in result of a crime (i.e. rape), reduced quality of life of the child (i.e. genetic problems and physical or mental defects), disadvantaged social factors (i.e. poverty), etc.

Pro-choice believers support the idea that women have the choice to do what they want with their bodies. In the article, “Yes, I’m Pro-Abortion,” Lauren Rankin asserts that being Pro-Choice means accepting abortion as one of the choices women have the right to make. Rankin says that abortion is not available for all women, especially a woman of color and low-income woman. The author also mentions that it sidelines abortion and delegitimizes the valid choice. I agree that if one chooses to be Pro-Choice, then one also accepts abortion as one of the choices women have the right to make because of individual rights and safety.

Many would argue that the mother could be a rape victim, or that it was just a mistake that she became pregnant, so it is unfair that she should be obligated to have the child. Of course, I sympathize with the rape victim and believe what happen to her is unfair and cruel, but I do not believe that killing the baby would be the solution. From the article in our reading by Judith Jarvis Thomson, A Defense of Abortion, she says: “Every person has a right to life. So the fetus has a right to life. No doubt the mother has a right to decide what shall happen in and to her body; everyone would grant that. But surely a person's right to life is stronger and more stringent than the mother's right to decide what happens in and to her body, and so outweighs it. So the fetus may not be killed; an abortion may not be performed.” (Judith Jarvis Thomson, A Defense of Abortion). It’s as if the reason for the author saying that the abortion is not to be performed is due to the fact that the baby’s life is important or sacred. What right do we have to take an innocent, sacred life with no other gain then to prevent a “possible” harm to the mother or others, which differs from the previous paragraph’s examples to the extent that it was to absolutely prevent harm or

It is a woman’s right to make decisions about her body. If she is the one that undergoes the stress that comes with childbirth, then it should be her right to ,and her right alone to decide whether or not she wants to go through it or not. Not doing so would violate her right to freedom of choice, as well as lead to unsafe abortions that could harm the mother (Nair, 2010). Another question is how could you kill a fetus or embryo when it is the same as a human being? Which begs the question, if the fetus is alive, then so are the eggs and sperm? How do you make the distinction?

Medical professionals today can screen for certain genetic traits (genetic diseases and sex) with in vitro fertilization and preimplantation genetic diagnosis to obtain a healthy child, and reproductive technology continues to improve. With this in mind, the question arises whether sex selection is ethical. Julian Savulescu, Uehiro Professor of Practical Ethics at Oxford University, argues that sex selection is moral, based on his ethical principle of Procreative Beneficence: that “couples (or single reproducers) should select the child, of the possible children they could have, who is expected to have the best life, or at least as good a life as the others, based on the relevant, available information” [Savulescu 1]. Savulescu claims

Abortion is defined as “The removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus in order to end the pregnancy” (dictionary.com). However, if only the debate over the abortion issue was as easy as the definition listed above. However, similar to most things in life, a statement or opinion is never right nor wrong, but simply left open for clarification. Those who are against abortion believe that abortion is the murder of innocent human beings who aren’t given a chance at life and the ability to function as a normal individual. However, those who are for abortion believe that it is a women’s right to choose what she does to not only her baby but

One day, Socrates went to the park to train for a 5k run he had signed up for. After running two miles, he decided to stop for a short break. As he was sitting on a bench, a young woman sat angrily down next to him to receive a phone call.