The question of induced abortion has remained divisive since it gained global attention in the 1970s, posing many complex moral and ethical implications that both support and oppose the concept. Morally, abortion is largely permissible when considering the interests of the pregnant woman, but could conversely be considered immoral if the fetus is granted personhood and the rights and interests that accompany it. For the Australian legislature, the prohibition of abortion poses numerous foreseeable negative implications that would make such legislation unethical. The physical side effects of abortion combined with the arguable personhood of the fetus pose ethical concerns for doctors performing the procedure. Australia’s abortion legislation, …show more content…
Ultimately, arguments from a diverse array of sources - philosophy, biology, religion, law, economics, human rights and more - inform both sides of the abortion debate, and on the balance of these arguments as a whole, a liberalised abortion policy is the best option in modern society. The moral permissibility of abortion hinges on the comparison between the mother’s rights and interests and the rights and interests of the fetus. In public discourse, one’s moral position on abortion is often defined by which side of this dichotomy one gives precedence to over the other. The pregnant woman’s interests support the argument for abortion; for instance, her moral entitlement to bodily integrity holds that she may counteract unwanted intrusion with her person. An unwanted pregnancy, with its physically and mentally taxing symptoms, clearly constitutes an ‘intrusion’; thus making it relevant to bodily integrity. Similarly in philosophy, libertarian thought espouses a ‘right to evict’ wherein a woman’s body is her property and the fetus in an unwanted pregnancy constitutes a trespasser. Although a property owner is obligated to reasonably minimise harm to the intruder when removing them, as it stands there is no abortion
For the past forty years, abortion has been a topic of great discussion in the subjects of ethics, politics, and law. This is largely attributed to the landmark decision made by the supreme court in the famous Roe v. Wade case where it was decided that women have the constitutional right to an abortion during the first two trimesters of pregnancy provided it follows the regulations put in place by the state. This case has been contentious since the court passed down its decision in 1973. The deep political divisions that the case created reflect not only conflicting social and moral views, but conflicting views of law as well. Supporters of the decision believe a woman 's right to choose whether to have an abortion or not is a fundamental right,
Abortion has always been one of the most controversial issues over the years and is still a topic of debate in the world today. Despite the constant debate and research done on the topic, there is no definitive answer on what is right and what is wrong about abortion. Two authors, Jane English, and Patrick Lee have put their contrasting beliefs and stance on the issue of abortion into their essays and I will be comparing both arguments. Jane English argues in her essay “Abortion and the Concept of a Person” that our concept of a person is not enough to settle the abortion issue. In addition, regardless of the personhood of the fetus, abortion is justifiable in the early stages of pregnancy to avoid modest harm and rarely justifiable in the
Abortion through a Feminist Ethics Lens Name Institution Abortion through a Feminist Ethics Lens Introduction Abortion stands out as one of the most controversial topics in world debates today. This is because of the many different views that each interested parties take on the subject. An example of a perspective that has been used to look into the issue of abortion is the feminist and non-feminist view of the legalization of abortion. These two groups do have different stands concerning abortion especially with relation to ethics and moral standards of the society. This essay is meant to present the ideas brought out by Susan Sherwin in her article ‘Abortion through a feminist ethics lens’.
First, an opponent may bring about the argument that there is no such thing as the right to someone’s body to begin with, thus rendering the notion that the fetus has no right to the mother’s body irrelevant. They may claim, rather, that the argument has nothing to do with a right to use the mother’s body and everything to do with the relative strengths of the right to life and the right to self control. If the right to life is one that never wavers (unless you intentionally hurt someone, which a fetus is incapable of), then the permissibility of abortion depends on the woman’s right to self control. If a woman is assaulted, then of course she never gave up her right to self control, and that right outweighs the fetus’s right to life. However, one may argue, if a woman engages in consensual sex she is sacrificing some of her right to self control, and a resulting fetus has a right to life stronger than this now reduced right to self control.
In a case where a woman must decide between continuing a pregnancy or seeking an abortion, her autonomy to choose reflects the value we place on having control over our own bodies (Purdy, 2006). While the other biomedical principles should be considered, it is unlikely that someone would willingly give control over her own body in
Abortion is not only a fluctuating concept in our society, but an ethical and emotional debate, as well. The image I have chosen presents concepts from a cultural and historical background, as well as presents an ethical, emotional, and logical appeal to the audience. The debate about abortion has simply been overblown and exhausted. The truth of the matter is, abortion is murder. Ending a life, whether innocent or guilty, is murder.
In “A Defense of Abortion,” Judith Thomson argues with a unique approach regarding the topic of abortion. For the purpose of the argument, Thomas agrees to go against her belief and constructs an argument based on the idea that the fetus is a person at conception. She then formulates her arguments concerning that the right to life is not an absolute right. There are certain situations where abortion is morally permissible. She believes that the fetus’s right to life does not outweigh the right for the woman to control what happens to her own body.
The debate whether abortion is morally permissible or not permissible is commonly discussed between the considerations of the status of a fetus and ones virtue theory. A widely recognized theory of pro-choice advocates can be thought to be that their ethical view is that fetus’s merely are not humans because they lack the right to life since they believe a fetus does not obtain any sort of mental functions or capability of feelings. Although this may be true in some cases it is not in all so explaining the wrongness of killing, between the common debates whether a fetus does or does not obtain human hood, should be illustrated in a way of a virtuous theory. The wrongness of killing is explained by what the person or fetus is deprived of, such as their right to life; not by means of a heart beat or function of one’s body, but by the fact that it takes their ability of potentially growing into a person to have the same human characteristics as we do.
Doris Gudino Professor Chounlamountry Political Science 1 27 July 2015 Pro-Choice Anyone? A woman has, undoubtedly, the freedom to procreate, but once a woman chooses to retreat from that freedom, a commotion arises. Abortion is a woman’s choice for many reasons. It’s her body, therefore, no one else can decide for said person.
1 The year 1973 marked the time when women were granted the right to procure an abortion if the given pregnant was unwanted. Despite the fact that the ruling of the supreme court did not hold the rights to be absolute, the court argued that the rights must be weighed against competing state interests regarding maternal safety and the safe guarding paternal life In as much as most feminist endorse some privileges to abortion, it is obvious that the issue of abortion cannot be derived to the interest of men against those of women. Consequently, women have a say on both side of the issue as leaders, activists and supports. As such, even within feminist perspectives on abortion, their views are varied on the grounds that serve to justify the act.
Introduction Abortion is generally regarded as a behavior that can artificially terminate a pregnancy. The research conducted by Wong et al (2003) mentions that nowadays the term abortion states induced abortion performed by trained doctors. According to the statistics collected by Solodnikov (2011), the legal regulations of abortion can be classified to three categories: ban, based on medical, exclusive and socioeconomic indications and completely legalized. It seems to be evident that people from different cultures and backgrounds hold diverse views on the issue based on different moral theories. Although the behavior has existed for thousands of years in the society, whether abortion is moral and permissible has still caused strong debates
Introduction Abortion always arises a number of ethical and moral issues. Currently, this problem is regulated by the law that empowers women to make decisions independently, and it, to some extent, deprives nurses of their responsibility or qualms of conscious because of abortion care. Obviously, abortion provokes serious questions, as it deals with morality of women that do not want to have a baby and with ethics of nurses that operate them. Without a doubt, an issue of abortion is highly controversial, but women should have a right to decide whether to terminate pregnancy or not. They may have many logical reasons, and each of them proves that it is the best option for a woman and her potential child.
Student name Instructor’s name Course title Date Abortion Abortion as understood in common language, is the termination of a pregnancy before the child or foetus is able to sustain its life processes outside their mother’s uterus. Medical definitions extend to cover what is commonly referred to as ‘miscarriage’ under spontaneous abortion. My paper intends to voice my opinion against the practice of induced abortion, touching on the major disadvantages as known to me and as experienced. For the purposes of this paper, abortion will be used to refer to induced abortion At the foundation of my argument is the fact that induced abortion principally infringes on the right of the unborn child to life.
This section started with the questions of why personhood is relevant to the abortion debate, what is a person and how can one identify personhood? Personhood is relevant because without an idea what is a person we cannot have a judgment whether foetuses are persons. Having a moral judgment about abortion seems heavily relies on the personhood of foetuses. We proposed that the arguments on the personhood of the foetus needs to be classified differently from the manner in which this task is carried out in the current literature. This was argued on the basis that the arguments from the intrinsic (essential) property of personhood are not making an argument from potentiality.
In contrast, some people feel that women should have the right to choose abortion, they should have the power to manage a decision as significant as parenthood, since they are the one who suffer the burdens (Anderson 1). Moreover, Peter K. McInerney contradicts Marquis’s statement by saying that abortion is not wrong because “killing a fetus is morally very different from killing a normal adult human” (268). Fetuses are not the same as normal adult human and young infants as well, since “a fetus at an early stage of development has neither a mental life of feelings, beliefs, and desires nor a developed brain and nervous system” (McInerney 266). Therefore, killing a fetus is not morally wrong since the fetus does not have a “future like ours”