The Moral and Ethical Controversy of Abortion Essay Example

is inducing birth by the use of different drugs. Saline injections are injected into the fetus resulting in the poisoning and the birth of the dead fetus.

According to Dr. Willke, there have been many cases where the baby is born alive and left to die. There is also a risk of death to the mother along with numerous physical and mental problems. Prostaglandin Chemical Abortion causes the uterus to contract intensely, pushing out the developing baby. The contractions are more violent than normal, natural contractions, so they frequently kill the unborn baby. However, there have been cases where they have also been born alive (Abortion Methods).

Induced abortion from the drug

Induced abortion from the drug known, as RU486 seems to be a relatively unobtrusive procedure that has few unpleasant consequences. A study by the World Health Organization showed satisfaction ratings among fifty participants were high in not only new abortees but also those who compared the RU486 to previous surgical abortions. In their study, the authors reported 35 of the participants had acceptable levels of pain and discomfort, while only 19 experienced mild discomfort and pain. The author’s evaluation showed high levels of satisfaction that they thought might be interpreted as an indication of good care. It was found that the women's physical and emotional status immediately after the abortion was not as good as before the occurrence of the pregnancy, but at the same time, none of the women self-rated their conditions as poor, reinforcing the idea that induced abortion is a relatively benign procedure. Pre-pregnancy health status was a very strong predictor of post-abortion status, and it was not the procedure per se, but

the condition, both physical and emotional, of the woman before the procedure that seemed to be of critical importance (Mamers, Pam M).

Invasion

The last category that Dr. Willke describes is the invasion of the uterus by abdominal surgery in the last three months of surgery. Unlike Caesarean delivery, the umbilical cord is cut while the baby is still in the womb, thus cutting off his oxygen supply and causing him to suffocate. Sometimes the baby is removed alive and simply left in a corner to die of neglect or exposure. Along with the moral issues of allowing a delivered child to die (which we will discuss later), there is also the threat to the mother including distress to the uterus, hemorrhage, septicemia, and even death.

Morality of abortion

Although many doctors agree this is a perfectly safe procedure, numerous studies show that there is a post-abortion as well as postpartum depression that may affect women. In some parts of the world, 27 to 35 percent of all maternal deaths can be attributed to abortion complications, though this is much less likely in more modern American medical facilities (Mason, Kate, and Grey, Dale). There are many ethical questions when it comes to abortions. One question asks “Is it morally wrong in every case to kill another human being, or are there instances in which taking another human being's life is justified? ” Moral philosophers have wrestled with this issue for centuries. The issue may be understood as it is above, that killing is morally wrong, or it may concentrate on specific instances which some belief alter the moral equation, such as in war, for purposes of euthanasia, or most

recently, with reference to the issue of abortion. Of course, the latter involves the further question of when human life begins so that the killing of a fetus can be considered the killing of a human being.

First, there is the argument of what constitutes a human being. There are many theories on life. Some believe that life begins with the first breath and ends with the last. This leads to the question of a breath. Is a child’s assisted breath through the umbilical cord the first breath or the first unassisted breath the real breath? Some believe that conception is the beginning of life while others like H. Tristram Engelhardt jr believe that life begins somewhere after birth.

Engelhardt states that “ .. The start of biological life is not the beginning of the life of a person as a moral agent. Rather, in human ontogeny months of biological life transpire before there is evidence of the life of a person as a moral agent. As a result, the moral status of zygotes, embryos, fetuses, and even infants is problematic in the general secular morality.” To Engelhardt, a person cannot be considered “persons” until they are able to make decisions, give permission and convey authority.

He asks, “What of animals, trees, and the environment? ” “It is only persons who reflect on the world and fashion accounts of its meaning. (Engelhardt, 140)”. According to Engelhardt, the pre-born, infants, and those with mental handicaps cannot be regarded as persons because they do not possess the “rich inward life of adult mammals”.Tooley asks: what properties must something have to be a person (i.e. to have a serious right to

life)? :

1. right to life requires a desire for life (something cannot have a right to X if it cannot desire X);
2. it cannot desire life if it has no concept of life, and
3. the concept of life requires self-consciousness; ergo, to be a person a thing must be conscious of itself.

(Caveat: the unconscious and depressed still have a right to life because they would desire it if they were not unconscious or depressed. ) Thus, fetuses and infants have no right to life. Exactly when elf-consciousness is attained is `obviously a matter for detailed psychological investigation' (Tooley, p. 83).

Second, there is the moral issue of murder and what in fact constitutes murder. Because Engelhardt doesn’t consider the pre-born to be persons, he does not consider abortion murder. In response to many pro-lifer’s regards to the fetus’s pain, he argues that for suffering to occur, there must be some fairly well developed frontal lobe connections to allow the entity not only the experience the pain, but to recognize the pain over time as a noxious quale that must be avoided (Engelhardt, 144). Engelhardt also argues that it is the mother and father that give the fetus “value” and as long as they are considered the “mother” and the “father”, they “have the first claim on making the definitive determination of its value (Engelhardt, 255)”.

Different religions and groups also have their own idea of murder and life. According to Roman Catholic theology, abortion was looked at as a moral sin of contraception, not murder. Most pro-life advocates do believe that an exception should be made in the case when a woman's life is in danger on

the grounds that while the fetus is a person so of course is the mother. In the same way, one may value life but also believe that it is permissible and moral to kill in self-defense or in war. ) Each person must decide for himself or herself where to draw the line.

In general, most pro-life people argue that abortions are morally (and so should be legal) permissible if without one the woman would die. If, however, there is a high probability that a woman's pregnancy will result in her death (as in the case of a tubal pregnancy, for example), then abortion is justified. For it is a greater good that one human should live (the mother) rather than two die (the mother and her child). Or, to put it another way, in such cases, the intent is not to kill the unborn (though that is an unfortunate effect) but to save the life of the mother. On the other side, pro-choicers see the preservation of women's autonomy as a social purpose.

McDonnell (1986) writes from a feminist perspective and offers a reexamination of the issue. Abortion has long been an important issue for feminists and one where choice is set forth as the right to be preserved against any challenge. McDonnell notes that the arguments over abortion seem to continue no matter what, and she further finds that the argument has often become a very emotional matter. Each side projects emotion into its debate, but in doing so, says McDonnell of the pro-choice side, pro-choicer may be missing important aspects of the issue that they share with the Right-to-Life side such as the importance

of the mother’s heath (as addressed above).

To understand this better, McDonnell calls for a reevaluation of the feminist position on abortion. There is a risk in reopening the abortion debate within the movement, but it is happening whether it is a risk or not and so should be addressed. A widely overlooked problem of abortions is an inevitability. Without a place to get a proper abortion, women find alternative means including illegal clinics, out-of-country doctors, and even self-inflicted abortion. These alternative types of abortion increase the risk of maternal death.

Although many people believe that abortion is murder, they agree that the mother’s health is more important. Abortions performed by professionals decrease fatal side effects to the mother, decrease pain and psychological problems and increase the rate of successful abortions. Although moral and ethical arguments make good points, the essential legalization of abortion and contraception has little to do with the various moral arguments offered or even with medical concerns about safety or physical or psychological health. The abortion decision before the Supreme Court was based on a question of privacy rights.

Privacy issues intersect with the Constitution in several different aspects, though there is no specific right of privacy enumerated in the Constitution. Cases involving the Fourth Amendment may deal with guards against physical and electronic snooping by the police. One dimension of privacy involves questions of "lifestyles" and control of a person's body (Roe Vs Wade). One doctor said to another doctor, "About the termination of a pregnancy, I want your opinion. The father was syphilitic (venereal disease). The mother tuberculosis (small lumps on the skin). Of the four children born, the first was blind,

the second died, the third was deaf and dumb, the fourth also tuberculosis. What would you have done?" "I would have ended the pregnancy". "Then you would have murdered Beethoven".

A purely rational (philosophical, bioethical) basis for the rightness or wrongness of abortion is impossible. Because the legal, medical, and social implications of abortion have been argued and never fully agreed upon, it is up to the women contemplating abortion to consider both the possible physical consequences of the act and the ethical issues raised by abortion. Every side has its stance and every government has its law. Because no one argument can be looked like the correct one, we must do our own weighing of consequences.

Women must look at the negative and positive results that may come from abortion and decide if it is right for them. Not doing so would be irrational and would be likely to contribute to psychological problems later.

References

1. Engelhardt, Tristram H. “The Foundations of Bioethics: second edition” 139-145, 255-2631996. Oxford.
2. “Supreme Court Collection: Roe VS Wade”, Cornell Law School, 1973; http://www. law. cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0410_0113_ZO.html;
3. Engelhardt HT. Introduction. In: Bondeson WB, Engelhardt HT, Spicker SF, Winship DH eds. Abortion and the status of the fetus. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1984: i-xxxv.
4. Mason, Kate, and Grey, Dale. “The controversy of Abortion”, 1998. ; http://www.uky. edu/Classes/PHI/305. 002/abrt.html;
5. Mamers, Pam M; Lavelle, Anna L; Evans, Amanda J; Bell, Sandra M; Rusden, Jen R and Healy, David L . “Women's satisfaction with medical abortion with RU486”. The Medical Journal of Australia, 1997. http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/sep15/mamers/mamers.html
6. “Abortion Methods: Surgical Abortions”. Niagara Region Right to Life Association, 1985. http://www.lifesite.net/abortiontypes/
7. McDonnell, K. (1986, Summer). "Not an easy choice." Whole Earth Review, 58-61. "Methotrexate
   

for the termination of early pregnancy-_a toxicology review" (1997, May 1). Reproductive Health Matters, 162_167.