Summary Of Abortion Patrick Lee

Abortion has become a common procedure in the American Society. Abortion is the extraction of an unborn human being from the womb that usually rips him or her to pieces (George and Lee 21). In Wrong of Abortion, published in Contemporary Debates in Applied Ethics, Patrick Lee and Robert P. George present abortion in the two views people approach it, pro-life or pro-choice. In their persuasive argument their ultimate purpose is to influence others why they should support pro-life through the contrast of pro-life and pro-choice. Patrick Lee, a professor of bioethics at Franciscan University of Steubenville has written books and articles on controversial issues such as abortion. Lee’s most recent book called Abortion and Unborn Human Life focuses

George and Lee define abortion as ripping the unborn living being from its mother’s womb (21). George and Lee describe abortion at a personal level as “having destroyed the human organism that you are or I am even at an early stage of our lives; would have been to kill you or me” (16). The author’s use of pathos appeal gives the reader a sense of emotion because it becomes personal. The author provokes the thought of being a victim of abortion in the reader’s mind. George and Lee believe “abortion, in most cases, is intentional killing” (20). George and Lee mention that the only cases where abortion would be appropriate and not defined as intentional killing is when the mother’s life is in harm. This statement was modified in the persuasive argument because George and Lee stated at the beginning that they believed “all abortions were intentional killing” (20). This is a prime example of the authors’ acknowledging that the opposition made a point that was legitimate. George and Lee note that pro-choice supporters believe that “an unborn human being has a right to life but that right does not entail that the child in utero is entitled to the use of the mother’s body for life support” (20). Pro-choice supporters defend the mother’s choice with this statement: “the mother has not voluntarily assumed responsibility for the

First of all, “the mother has a special responsibility to her child because of her being the biological mother (as does the father in virtue of his paternal relationship)” (George and Lee 22). George and Lee mention the father’s responsibilities because they believe the father has equally the responsibility as the mother. Between the offspring and the mother, as well as between the offspring and the father there is a natural unity (George and Lee 23). George and Lee describe this as a unique unity because the offspring essentially was created from a part of the mother and the father. George and Lee believe “since we have special responsibilities to those with whole we are closely united, it’s true that there is a special responsibility to our children anterior to having voluntarily assumed the responsibility or consented to the relationship” ( 23). The authors’ use the logos appeal in that statement for the reader to understand their reasoning. Second of all, “in the types of case we are considering, the harm caused (death) is much worse than the harms avoided (the difficulties in pregnancy)” (George and Lee 23). George and Lee mention possible difficulties of pregnancy to be the physical changes of the body, labor, and financial costs. George and Lee follow the statement with if the mother and father are not financially or physically