Ethical Dilemma Of Abortion Essay

In the 1960s, there was a push in America to legalize abortion. The abortion debate is still alive and well in 2023, despite the world being very different from the past. For instance, the 1973 Roe v. Wade court case's abortion rights were recently reversed by the Supreme Court. The court case gave pregnant women the freedom to decide what to do with their own bodies thanks to a legal victory. Abortion acceptance has altered significantly over the years compared to the 1960s, but it has undoubtedly not been resolved. As a result, numerous studies have been done to support both sides of the debate in clinical, moral, and ethical standpoints. Given that science can be proven, morality and ethics are subjective to the individual.

Both pro-life

The abstract, “The Ethical Dilemma of Abortion” by Christina M. Robinson, explains many principles and gives examples of this topic in the real world. As an illustration, consider the Nuremberg Code, a set of ethical research guidelines for using human subjects developed by the court in U.S. v. Brandt, one of the Nuremberg trials that followed the Second World War. For example, Robinson states, “These stringent fetal research regulations were designed to protect fetuses from presumably uncaring pregnant women, especially those who were contemplating abortion, and overzealous researchers. In the absence of the subject’s ability to give informed consent and protect his own 3 interests, fetal research regulations were designed to protect the subject’s welfare along the lines of the Nuremberg Code” (Robinson,2021, pg. 8). The argument against abortion, or the pro-life position, is founded on three principles: The Human Rights Principles, the Mens Rea Principle, and the Harm Principle. e. “The Mens Rea Principle states that “the intentions of the agent should be given weight.” Thus, this principle is violated by abortion as the agent intentionally killed another, as the pregnancy is terminated deliberately and knowingly… Furthermore, the Harm Principle, which prescribes, as a norm, that “you should not inflict

The articles, “Ethics and Abortion” by Michael W. Austin Ph.D. and “Abortion” by MU School of Medicine, both discuss the morality of abortion. As his moral justification for abortion, Dr. Austin uses the concept of "personhood." He states, “Personhood refers to the moral status of an entity. If an entity is a person, in this sense, it has full moral status. A person, then, has rights, and we have obligations to that person. This includes the right to life. Both arguments I summarize here focus on the question of whether a fetus is a person, or whether it is the type of entity that has the right to life” (Austin, 2019, p.3). Dr. Austin argues that abortion would be unethical considering this concept of personhood. Whether or not the fetus is regarded as a person or other thing with a right to life is a contentious issue. The mentality of pro-life and pro-choice activists greatly diverge, and this question plays a significant role in that. Killing someone is morally terrible, of course, but is the fetus really a person or an entity? “Moral status alone might not determine whether abortion is morally permissible, 4 though, for some thinkers believe other factors might override the moral status of the fetus” (MU School of Medicine, 2020, p. 13). The article suggests that there are elements that could trump the morality of the fetus, allowing abortion. Such