Ethical Issues In Sheila And Roger Selective Abortion

Abortion is an emotional issue that deserves special attention. I believe in the case of Sheila and Roger selective abortion would be appropriate. In this case, Sheila’s prenatal diagnosis determined that Sheila is carrying a set of twins with a genetic disease that will compromise their lives forever. Sheila is very aware of any possible detriments if she gives birth to the twins because her sister has a child with Cystic Fibrosis. Considering the circumstances Sheila and Roger must decide what is in the best interest of the fetuses. Sheila’s situation results in a dilemma no matter what approach she takes. If she decides to carry on the pregnancy the disease has no cure and it would eventually end their life. The twins would spend much time

Respecting autonomy reserves the right to act freely in her decision. My perception in this matter is that no matter what Sheila decides, her decision should be respected. The next ethical principle to support this position is the principle of double effect. The principle of double effect is used to justify a course of action that has two types of effects, one good and one bad. According to Idziak, the principle of double effect, “the act itself must be morally good or neutral, only the good consequences of the act must be intended, the good effect must not be produced by means of the evil effect, and there must be some weighty evil for permitting the evil” (p.16). Abortion due to the fetus having an abnormality falls under this category. Giving the fetuses life guarantees death and suffering in so many areas. According to Idziak, “Aborting an abnormal fetus prevents suffering for the child…giving life to the fetus would cause more harm to it than denying it life through abortion. Because of the poor quality of life, the child would have if born, abortion can be seen as being in the best interest of the child” (p.

Talk of justice often refers specifically to the concept of distributive justice, which concerns the distribution of such social benefits and burdens as medical services” (p. 5). The reason this principle applies is that aborting the fetuses would benefit society as a whole. It is costly money, it is expensive to provide healthcare for individuals with severe health issues. Saving the cost can be beneficial to utilize in other resources for children with special needs. According to Idziak, “Aborting abnormal fetus’s benefits society as a whole. Abortion brings about a substantial saving of societal resources that would otherwise be used for special care education of children suffering from serious diseases. These resources can be used for individuals who are able to make return to society” (p. 41). Although this seems unfair, it is a reality that people face in the world. Couldn’t express how sad this makes me, but my emotions do not change the reality of the situation. Of course, every case should be considered case by case because every case is different and people have different values and