A Brief Summary On Abortion

In the news article “Abortion: Every Woman’s Rights” Sharon Smith wrote an article about women’s rights to get abortions prior to the hearing of the Planned Parenthood v. Casey court case, “which threatened to severely restrict women access to abortion” (Smith). Women wanted reproductive control over their lives and felt that they were not equal to men no matter what advances they got at work and how high their level of education was. The women’s right movement wanted women to have the choice of abortion for all women, the rich and the poor. In the US, thirty- seven states did not provide

The issue of abortion is one of the most sensitive and controversial issues faced by modern societies. This issue leads to topics of whether abortion is right or wrong, if it is the actual killing of a person, and what actually defines the moral status of a fetus. In this paper, I will be arguing against Bonnie Steinbock, who believes that abortions are morally acceptable. So I will be supporting the view that abortions are not morally acceptable.

Abortion is the process of intentionally ending a pregnancy. Abortion touches the hearts of many because its consequences result in the loss of a human life. Its controversy stems from the fact that people’s opinions on this matter are rooted in their value systems, religious beliefs, and political socialization. Its prominence in political discussions today is likely to continue given the relationship between unwanted pregnancies and overpopulation. There is often debate about the constitutionality of abortion, as it is not specifically addressed by any doctrine. As a result, there has never been an explicit national law enacted.

In “A Defense of Abortion” by Judith Jarvis Thompson, Thompson works to argue that even if a human fetus is considered a person, abortion is still often morally permissible. This paper will work to explain Thompson’s positions on the different accounts of the right to life, and to provide an evaluation of them and explain why they are not plausible, specifically regarding three of the analogies on-which she based her entire argument: the violinist, the coat, and the case of Kitty Genovese, as well as to explore a logical counterargument and explain why it’s stance is impermissible.

Annotated Bibliography Ahmed, Aziza. “Informed Decision Making and Abortion: Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Informed Consent, and the First Amendment.” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, March 2015. Web.

"Abortion in the United States." : Quick Stats. Guttmacher Institute, n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2016.

In Thompson’s “A Defense of Abortion” she tries to answer the question: “Is voluntary abortion ever permissible?” Throughout the paper, she uses a variety of thought experiments in order to parallel pregnancy due to rape, accidental pregnancy, and pregnancy that threatens a mother’s life, among many other situations. Using these examples, she illustrates her main point: that unless a fetus has a right to demand it, the mother is not morally required to make large sacrifices to keep the fetus alive. Therefore, abortion is permissible in cases where the mother is pregnant against her will or when the cost of keeping the fetus is high. The main objection to her argument is the fact that she relies heavily on the reader’s intuition to reach

Annotated Bibliography Kools, S, Levi, A,J,& McLemore,M,R, (2005),Calculus formation: nurses’ decision-making in abortion-related Care, Research in Nursing and Health,38, 222-231. Doi:10.1002/nur.2165. This is a research study conducted by three professors in the United States of America about the ethical issue-Abortion and how it influences in nursing care. It also explains the approach of nurses towards ethically challenging work- abortion in different departments.

How would you feel if someone took away your ability to live? Imagine not having any say in whether or not you want to have a life. Well babies don't have a choice in their mother’s womb. If a woman decides to abort her baby, they can't do anything about their life being taken away from them. Their whole future is demolished. I believe abortion is wrong when committing it for a selfish reason.

What is the life of a fetus worth in your eyes? It may seem like a simple answer at first thought, but what if said fetus had a name? Or what if that fetus was your child to be? Famed moral philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson attempted to address these sorts of questions in her landmark essay, “A Defense of Abortion.” However, I believe that Thomson’s argument is misguided. Thomson uses questionable premises to assert questionable conclusions and thus, I believe that her argument is misguided. My argument follows as such:

Abortion and the morality of it has been a hot topic for years in the United States although it has been carried out for centuries in different cultures. Abortion is a medical procedure deliberately terminating a pregnancy. Abortions usually happen within the first 28 weeks of pregnancy and are considered an outpatient procedure. The first abortion laws were passed by Britain in 1803 and by 1880 most abortions in the U.S. were illegal, except for those that were performed to save the life of a woman. This exception to the rule gives insight into the battle that exists today and the ethical debate of abortion.

On the other hand, Marquis's believes that abortion is immoral. He argues that all cases of abortion is wrong and rarely will there be special circumstances to justify the killing of a human being. In Marquis's opinion, killing a fetus is equal to killing an innocent adult life. His whole argument is based off a major assumption.

“On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion”, an essay written by Mary Anne Warren, defend abortion in any stage of a woman’s pregnancy (pg 468). Warren argues that the potential to become a human being is not the same as being human and deserving the same right to life (pg. 468-472). This essay asserts that in order to be human, one must possess five particular traits (pg. 470). These trait are consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, the ability to communicate, and awareness of oneself (pg. 470). Warren claims that since a fetus has not yet acquired all of the traits, then that fetus is not human and therefore does not have the right to life (pg. 470).

One of the most frequently debated topics in bioethics is the morality of abortion, or the ending of a pregnancy without physically giving birth to an infant. Often times abortions are categorized into either spontaneous, a natural miscarriage; induced or intentional, which is premeditated and for any reason; or therapeutic, which albeit intentional, its sole purpose is to save the mother’s life. It seems however that moral conflicts on issue mainly arise when discussing induced abortions. In general, people universally agree it is morally wrong to kill an innocent person and in some people’s eyes induced abortions are the intentional killings of innocent persons, thus making them immoral. However not all individuals view fetuses as persons and consequentially argue it is not morally wrong to kill them.

In a discussion of both politics and morality, medical anthropologist M. Jean Heriot compares and contrasts several proposed Mississippi Laws that concern abortion. In doing so, she discusses both the implications of various definitions of personhood as given to the fetus, as well as the rights of the mother and how they are impacted by these definitions.