A Discussion on Morality of Abortion

Published: 2021-06-25 01:40:45
1191 words
5 pages
10 min to read
letter-mark
B
letter
University/College: 
Boston College
Type of paper: 
Essay
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

A general definition of abortion is a woman performance to terminate the life of her unborn child. The termination encompasses the woman allowing a medic to extinct the pregnancy or alternatively voluntarily ending it herself. Discussions on morality and legality of a woman option of abortion fail to produce a satisfactory answer. The moral position of abortion is difficult to predetermine since a woman cannot successfully argue and provide a tangible defense that an unborn fetus is not necessarily human. However, some Groups and individuals argue that abortion is illegal and a deviation of society values that needs upholding (McDonagh, 1996). The basis of their argument cements on the idea that a fetus in a woman womb does not have the full capacity to be classify as human. This concludes that an unborn child does not entitle to prescription of moral privileges of a person.

Some philosophers however fail to agree on the reasoning of their opponents who describes a fetus as an entity that do qualify to ascribe to moral civil liberties of a human being. The pro-abortion philosophers, referred to as pro-abortionists, argue that their position is apparent morally and do not need any kind of substantiation (Thomson, 1971). This is because there has been no existent of undefeatable grips that adequately explain irrefutable conceptual issues that ambiance abortion (Manninen, 2014). However, the laws advanced by anti- abortion activists in relation to laws that bar abortion makes it not only criminal but also unconstitutional since they fail to successfully provide an argument against traditional beliefs on murder. They categorically fail to refute the traditional view of abortion that states a fetus is a human being from the moment of conception thus abortion is a violation of constitutional right of life of an individual, considered as murder (McDonagh, 1996).

The pro and anti abortion activists arguments sometimes prove too hard to refute based on the circumstance at hand. The pro abortion rely on the side effects that a woman is faced with incase she does not abort (Munson, 1996). The argument is that, denying a woman right to use abortion deprives her entitlement to unquestionable power of her body (Little, 1999). Additionally, underprivileged women and their consequential families largely suffer from these restraining legislations. This is because, an additional responsibility of taking care of the newborn, medical, educational, and clothing need arises. A poor woman finds it difficult to cater for the additional tasks thus depriving the newborn infants basic needs. On the other side, anti- abortionists fails to appreciate the tragic and unbearable effects that a new birth poses to a woman (Thomson, 1971). Their justifications rely on the hypothesis that murder is unlawful irrespective of the arising consequences of barring it.

The pros argument of entitlement of an individual to control his or her own body is a general mistake in reference to constitutional property rights of an individual. The view is considerable feeble to defend the prohibition of abortion. Philosophers against it states that finding an individual in a property who own does not inevitably accord you the civil liberties to kill him or her regardless of whether you had permitted him or not (Thomson, 1971). They proceed to argue that if such an individual injures himself within the premise or is his expulsion result to death, the owner holds responsibility. Equally, a woman opting for abortion co control her body to avoid consequential happenings does so consciously, which makes her a criminal.

Abortion opposition considers a fetus as an individual empowered with fully rights of a person from the instant of conception. The argument posed by pro-abortionists which those against reject is that there is existence of a line that defines when a fetus is to appreciate as normal human being. Thompson however refutes the premise that a fetus is a person from the time an egg fertilizes. He defines an ovum that has fertilized as a cell clump no different from an acorn existing in an oak tree. The premise put through here is that a fetus is a tissue that should measure human when birth takes place (Munson, 1996). Philosophers against abortion focus are on establishment of fetus as a person without a clear explanation on the issue of abortion impermissibility (Manninen, 2014). For example in rape cases, the opposition does not provide the way forward. In addition, they do not make any exception in incidences where a pregnancy can render a mother bed-ridden until the time of birth.

Thompson notes that the opposition ignores abortion even in extreme cases. Surely, when pregnancy continuation is likely to end mothers life, abortion should permit. She provides a scenario where a woman in her early stages of pregnancy realizes that she has a condition, say cardiac, and possibility of death is most likely, termination has to take place (Thomson, 1971). The argument that performance of abortion amounts to murder is weak since it fails to realize that failure to take action to save mothers life equals direct killing (Feldt & Jennings, 2002). A woman has the right to defend her life if the infant poses a danger to her life even if termination of the unborn has to take place. Anti-abortion argument on extreme cases when abortion has to take place is prejudiced.

A logical assessment should grant a woman the rights on when she should have children or when to abort. The evaluation should concentrate on a woman capability to successfully raise a child morally, financially and, socially stable (Manninen, 2014).Thompson emphasizes on various factors. Some of these are their maturity level, financial aspect in relation to their income and asset stability, and stability of the father mother relationship. This clearly shows that government should not bow down to abortion opposition to legislate laws that prohibit the right of a woman to decide or to choose her option of her pregnancy. Thompson reasons that the opposition should recognize the hardships that encompass a successful raise of a child. Upbringing a child does not only rely on financial stability of the two parties involved but also on commitment of the parents (Thomson, 1971). For a child to grow successfully, the social environment has to be welcoming and appreciative of the new participant joining their group. Environment that is emotional and socially friendly defines who a child grows up to be.

Logically, equating fetus abortion with murder is unfeasible. This is because the scientific and scientific accession proves otherwise. A fetus cannot be viewed as a human being since not is it not alive but also its existence as human is not guaranteed. The opposition of abortion should agree with the premise that a child that is not yet born equals the brain of a dead person. A fetus in her mothers womb has no difference with a dead person since no conscious activity and self-awareness on its part satisfy human existence.

References

Feldt, & Jennings. (2002). Behind Every Choice is a Story.

Little, M. (1999). Abortion, Intimacy, and the Duty to Gestate,. 295312.

Manninen, B. A. (2014). A KANTIAN DEFENSE OF ABORTION RIGHTS. 7092 .

McDonagh, E. (1996). Breaking the Abortion Deadlock: From Choice to Consent.

Munson, R. (1996). Intervention and Reflection: Basic Issues in Medical Ethics. pp 69-80.

Thomson, J. J. (1971). A Defense of Abortion.

 

 

Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the customtermpaperwriting.org website, please click below to request its removal: