According to Linda, the decision of having the abortion was extremely lonely regardless of the fact that the husband supported her. The abortion came as an option since the birth of a new child was unexpected and would come with additional burdens. The husband would also be barred from changing his fourteen years job.
The woman was also visualizing the difficulties regarding baby care and how much work she could be able to do. The youngest child was finally ready for school and it would be difficult to raise another one. The men at the Womens Services were uncomfortable and embarrassed.
According to George, there was no emotional distress after the first abortion. In Lindas case, there was no emotional distress at the beginning since the couple had come to the conclusion that abortion was the best option considering the circumstances they were in. However, Linda was bothered when her name was called and the doctor was injecting her (Francke 34). Similarly, George kept thinking about womens rights and the ethical guidelines of what he was doing.
The women at the waiting room were silent since they were ashamed that they were going to kill innocent souls. After the abortion, Linda and her husband did not talk but held hands. They were guilty as they tried to hide everything from their children by pretending that life was normal. The woman was concerned about her modernity and the fact that she was about to kill regardless of the great care she had given to her other children.
Just as Linda was guilty after the abortion and felt that there was a space for another child, George felt sympathy for young college ladies and anger for married couples. It reached a point where George was gravely bothered and he started questioning his sensitivity. At home, he was embraced by his children while he engaged in abortions at his workplace. George was horrified for playing with a child he wanted to abort seven years earlier.
Linda felt that there was a space for another child, which implies that she was unlikely to engage in any more abortions (Flesh par 4).Furthermore, she would return to the clinic to have an IUD inserted. Similarly, George eventually became too bothered about his Christian values. He felt that his spiritual aspirations and intellectual integrity were at stake. This made him stop doing any more abortions.
Contrast
George was extremely tortured after doing 2nd trimester abortions. Consequently, he stopped doing these. On the other hand, the experts in Lindas case do not portray any emotional distress. On the contrary, they were busy advising women on family planning so as to stop further abortions. They also seem to be encouraging the women by assuring them that the pain would not last for long.
George cares more about the young women abandoned by their boyfriends. The gratitude the women have gives George great satisfaction after carrying out the minor operations. On the contrary, he was distressed after extracting parts of foetus one by one during second trimester abortion.
Recommendations
In both cases, it is important for George and Linda to have realised from the beginning that abortion is a grave sin. One is bothered for the rest of his life since the memory of the abortion is never erased. In my opinion, every person should value life and keep away from abortion, which deals with destroying innocent and vital lives. The religion should offer stringent guidelines regarding abortion.
Works Cited
Flesh, George. Why I Stopped Doing Abortions. 1991. Web.
Francke, L. Bird. The ambivalence of abortion. London: Random House, 1978. Print.
Abortion could be spontaneous thus known as a miscarriage or it could be induced. In most of the cases, the term abortion is used when referring to the purposely-induced pregnancy termination. As such, abortion has attracted much controversy among different people all over the world (Friedman 1). There are nations that have legalized abortion while others still hold that abortions are illegal and those found guilty of the offence ought to be punished. However, one of the main problems in the legalization of abortion is age. Those against the legalization of abortion claim that the process is normally not appropriate for girls under the age of eighteen years. This paper is therefore an in-depth analysis of reasons for illegalizing abortion for girls under the age of eighteen years.
Pregnancy in underage girls could come about because of cases of rape or unsafe sexual behavior. Most often than not, underage girls who fall victim are normally not prepared for the pregnancy. Thus, the first thing that comes into their mind upon realization of the pregnancy is how to terminate it. The idea is not only theirs but also their partners, siblings, and parents think the same. This cannot be blamed on the people but the society, which dictates what people do and how they do it (Friedman 1). For instance, a teenage girl would rather undergo an abortion and risk her life just to avoid being looked down upon by her colleagues because of carrying the pregnancy to term.
It is important to note that life is God-given and despite the circumstances that led to the pregnancy, the victim should realize that it was intended to happen by God (Friedman 1). In all religions, life is known to be sacred and only God has the authority to terminate it. Therefore, all nations that believe in God ought to respect Him and illegalize abortion. Additionally, abortion for underage girls should be illegalized because of the health risks involved. Induced abortion is carried out using different methods such as use of herbs, sharp tools, and medical drugs just to mention a few. The reproductive system of underage girls is normally very tender thus, when surgical procedures are used to induce abortions, chances are high that some vital organs could be damaged. The damage of the vital organs has negative impacts on the girl later in life. Research done indicates that a higher percentage of women having fertility problems in the childbearing age are those that underwent an abortion at underage. Thus, if a nation cares about its future generation, it should not legalize abortion for girls under the age of eighteen years.
Finally yet importantly, abortions are known to bring about both physical and emotional trauma (Mead 1). This is because of the painful procedures involved and the feeling of being a murderer that the victims succumb to after the process. Abortions have made people bedridden for months making them not perform their normal duties. Most of the underage girls are in school or college thus undergoing an abortion for them means that they miss school for the time they will be bedridden. In addition to this emotional trauma affects their performance in academic and social life (Mead 1). It is therefore not justified to legalize abortion for girls under the age of eighteen years.
Controversial health issues create heated debates people like discussing, disputing, or disagreeing on. There are many controversial health issues ranging from their causes to treatment. The medical fraternity consistently debates the best ways of treating various diseases, with new research emerging to transform how medical professionals think about a specific condition. Moreover, how the public views a particular medical condition shapes how medical experts treat it. However, it should be noted that controversial health issues result from ignorance, lack of awareness, and denial.
COVID-19, mental health, and HIV/AIDS are among the most discussed health issues. The novel coronavirus has recently become a subject of debate concerning health matters. The fact that the disease caught the world by surprise made it even more controversial. There have been issues related to the use of face masks and the number of cases of infected people. Facemasks became a trend worldwide, with some casting doubts on their effectiveness and usefulness in combating the disease. Scientists have been using two approaches to estimate the true prevalence of the disease. The first approach was to test a sample of individuals for antibodies in a population. The other method is to project the number of people affected by the virus using mathematical models. These two approaches offer different estimates, creating even more, debate and controversy.
Mental health is another health issue that is substantially controversial and is still a subject of debate for many people. The condition has caught the worlds imagination because of the high number of depressed people who have resorted to suicide. Mental health awareness has been a topic that has drawn the attention of advocates. It has created much contention with topical issues such as its severity, prevalence, symptoms, essence, scope, effect, and characteristics (Reardon, 2018). It is a condition that has never been wholly understood, with many people offering differing opinions. All these divergent opinions have given rise to more controversies regarding the condition and have triggered consistent and relentless discussions.
Autism is another controversial health issue due to the various definitions and descriptions linked to it, especially by medical experts. Some medical specialists associate this condition with mental health or disorders. The topic of autism is a huge controversy due to denial or a lack of awareness. Many medical professionals term the disease a developmental disorder instead of a mental one. Their arguments are vital because they differentiate autism from mental illness in many ways. According to them, one of the most significant differences is that while mental illness is treatable, other developmental disorders like autism lead to lifelong disabilities.
In conclusion, these controversial health issues are caused by a lack of knowledge concerning their characteristics. Ignorance of these diseases leads to speculation and guesswork, resulting in more confusion. Most people offering views about these diseases do not use scientific evidence to explain what causes such ailments. They depend on hearsay which leads to more controversies. For example, the emergence of the coronavirus came as a surprise, with various quarters giving divergent opinions of what the disease was, its cause, and how to prevent it. These conflicting views created more confusion about the condition; some refused to use face masks as a preventative measure. Moreover, these controversial health issues result from the belief that incurable diseases are mysterious, which triggers more debate. It is challenging to find controversies on ailments that are curable or which can be well-managed.
Reference
Reardon, D. C. (2018). The abortion and mental health controversy: A comprehensive literature review of common ground agreements, disagreements, actionable recommendations, and research opportunities. SAGE Open Medicine, 6.
Across the globe, many countries, people, and institutions are in a state of dilemma when it comes to dealing with abortion on the grounds of disability. Two groups that are pro-abortion and anti-abortion have different opinions about the act. In the context of societal norms, conducting abortion is against the virtues that hold people together. Removing a fetus from the womans womb results in death which is contrary to the morals of the community that is against killing. Terminating pregnancy because of disability indicates a lack of respect for people with different disorders within the community.
Introduction
In the current society and the system of laws globally, abortion has created different opinions from various groups of people, governments, and even health institutions. In some countries, the act of terminating a fetus has been legalized, and women have the right to remove them. Other nations, however, have strong laws that prohibit the practice. This presentation will focus on abortion in relation to disability, drawing the arguments against the idea from the ethical theories.
Definition of Abortion
The exact definition of abortion is not known since various institutions give it their terms. The most common understanding is that it is the termination of pregnancy, or it can be referred to as the removal or expulsion of the fetus from the womb before developing stable human features. During the process of abortion, the conceived child is killed. It is conducted at the early stages of the pregnancy up to about the 20th week. In some conditions, it is performed for medical reasons, while at times, it is a family agreement.
Reasons for Abortion
Generally, there are various reasons for conducting abortion in society. Some of the arguments include saving the mothers life and supposing the pregnancy would result in health problems or death. Furthermore, it is done to prevent the birth of seriously disabled children, stop underage females from having kids, and avoid siring a baby conceived as a result of incest or rape1. In some countries, there are government policies that allow people to perform an abortion to reduce the population.
Reasons against Abortion
In society, there is an anti-abortion group that is completely against the act of terminating pregnancies. According to those individuals, the practice deprives the potential human being right to life. Furthermore, it results in pain and suffering to the fetus, increasing infanticide in the community. Basing the argument in line with ethics, they argue that abortion is not morally right, and tolerating it may result in more intentional killings. In addition, the group believes that the act reduces the number of future people.
Discussion
The paradox of abortion and disability is confusing, therefore, creating a real dilemma since it tends to have several outcomes. In society, there are many people with diseases and disorders, yet they are surviving. It, therefore, implies that terminating pregnancy based on disability is wrong since people in such conditions would feel unwanted and discriminated against by the rest of the people. Furthermore, all potential human beings have to live; hence securing abortion deprives them of their basic rights.
Arguments in Relation to Social Ethics
In the societal setup, there are moral principles that guide peoples acts. For example, the killing of people is against the norms of the community; therefore, terminating the life of a potential future human is equally wrong. Individuals should be loving and caring, which is contrary to the practice of abortion. Additionally, respect for other human rights is an essential aspect of society. Continuous abortion would make women adopt unwelcoming traits of getting rid of the embryo without constructive reasons. Pregnant women should be supported to maintain their pregnancies so that future generations can be protected.
In a case where abortion is tied to a disability, mothers with different intentions may claim disorders and have their fetus removed from the uterus. According to the consequentialism theory of ethics, pregnancy should only be terminated if doing so would make the mothers life free from danger3. Allowing the act in society may increase the immoral behaviors of youths, making them conceive at a younger age than going for an abortion. Unfortunately, the disorder has no age limit. It may strike in old age; therefore, people should not get rid of potential humans because of their conditions.
Conclusion
Generally, procuring abortion under claims of disability is not morally right. The act is against the norm of society that encourages life and condemns death. Whenever pregnancy is terminated because of a disorder, the other social group with a similar condition would feel less worthy in the community. If the community tolerates the practice, the normal human virtues would be eroded hence leaving the people without a limited sense of personality.
One in every five pregnancies in the world results in abortions.
Rates of abortion differ from one area to another due to the differences in the existing laws that relate to abortion.
UK is currently considering legalizing abortion.
The main aim of the paper is to study the perceptions of nurses attending to abortion patients.
Literature review
In 2003, approximately forty-two million women voluntarily aborted. This was out of the 205 million women around the world.
About 50% of those who aborted did this through illegal and unsafe means.
Unsafe abortions-mostly practiced in the developing countries-were classified as the major contribution to the death of many mothers.
Ninety two % of the cases in the developed countries follow the legal procedure and therefore, are safe.
Most of the developed countries permit abortion if it is meant to save the womans life. In 31 countries, however, abortion is conducted upon request (Huntington, 2002).
Abortion is common in many countries but little is known about the attitudes and perceptions of the nurses giving this care.
Abortion Act of UK provides for the legal period within which abortion could be requested and accepted. This should be within 24 weeks after conception.
Campaigners argued against abortion stating that the fetus was an unborn baby and had every right to live.
Pro-choice campaigners thought otherwise. They believed that the mother could choose abortion since the fetus did not have rights before birth (Griffith & Tengnah, 2007).
Recent research suggests that midwives performing abortion (13 weeks gestation period) need to manage stress (Lipp, 2008).
Methodology
The study followed an exploratory qualitative design.
Three abortion clinics in the United Kingdom were selected for the study.
Participants had to go through surgical or induced abortions (or both).
Interviews (lasting between 30-45 minutes) were conducted on the potential participants using the semi-structured technique.
Nine nurses volunteered for the exercise.
Attitudes towards abortion were assessed as the 24-week limit drew close.
Eight participants were audio-recorded while the other preferred to hand-write.
Conclusion
The results took two directions: Nurses attitudes towards abortion and those coping with abortion.
Their awareness to the social ills of abortion led some to believe that they were doing the wrong thing. They hesitated to disclose their profession as nurses when with peers.
They felt that the patients had misconceptions about their attitudes toward the nurses since they felt like they would be judged for terminating the pregnancy.
Participants displayed evidence of coping with abortion since they defended themselves and said that it was the decision of the client and not the nurses.
The nurses, however, did not encourage or support late gestation abortion.
Implications
The participants supported the idea that women should be the ones to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy or not.
One way in which nurses avoided stress or coped with their profession was by using the term fetus rather than baby. This helped them cope emotionally (McQueen, 1997).
They also said that the fact that they were providing their services did not mean they completely supported it.
In some situations, the nurse could avoid confrontation from a client by leaving her to be attended to by another.
References
Griffith, R., & Tengnah, C. (2007). Termination of pregnancy: A case for a change in the law. British Journal of Community Nursing, 12(7), 317318.
Huntington, A.D. (2002). Working with women experiencing mid-trimester termination of pregnancy: The integration of nursing and feminist knowledge in the gynecological setting. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 11, 273279.
Lipp, A. (2008). Supporting the significant other in women undergoing abortion. British Journal of Nursing, 17(19), 12321236.
Abortion is a controversial topic because it deals with the question of human life and death. There are no contemporary ethical issues so emotionally charged and inviting of public, political, legal and moral controversy as those involving matters of life and death. Abortion is one such ethical issue and one that has the capacity not only to cause extreme and damaging divisions among people, but violence as well. abortion is defined differently by those who do support it and those who do not. This is significant, in that it again raises questions concerning the supposed value neutrality of so-called objective moral definitions and concepts, and the extent to which these can be ethically loaded (Stetson 34). Thesis Using sociological imagination, it is evident that abortion is morally right and permissible because it benefits a woman and society in general.
Personal Sociological Imagination
In order to describe the question of abortion it is important to define and explain it. Abortion as a spontaneous or induced termination of pregnancy (Stetson 32), and miscarriage as the the spontaneous loss of an early pregnancy at any stage before the twentieth week after conception (Stetson 34). Pro-abortionists use similar language when discussing abortion, tending typically to define it in terms such as terminating pregnancy or ridding the products of unwanted conception . Anti-abortionists, by contrast, tend typically to define abortion in such terms as artificially causing the miscarriage of an unborn child , or of killing an innocent human being (Stetson 32).
Primarily, the question of abortion affects women and their health. The decision to make an abortion involves emotional and psychological trauma, but it some cases it can be the only possible solution to family problems. Abortion is not morally wrong because it helps a woman and family to make their choice and control their destiny. If we want poor women to make choices which might benefit the larger community then society needs to make choices which benefit poor communities (Colker 49). Critics state that abortion is a traumatic event causing emotional suffering. Thus, pregnancy and child birth is mare traumatic causing physical changes and psychological stress. A woman should have a right to choose her destiny and avoid health risks. Very often, illnesses and psychological disorders are the main causes of abortion. Some women have to choose between personal health and unborn child. Another popular argument raised in defense of abortion under a moderates banner is that a woman is under no moral obligation to bring a pregnancy to term, particularly in instances where the pregnancy has been forced upon her (as in the case of rape), or where the pregnancy has not resulted from a voluntary and informed choice (as in cases involving the intellectually impaired, the ignorant and uneducated, or, quite simply, contraceptive failure). A woman who has not chosen to engage in sexual intercourse is not likely to have the opportunity to choose to use contraception (and certainly will not be able to persuade her partner to use contraception) (Colker 68).
Financial considerations are also important when a woman decides to abort a child. The fundamental mistake in the Courts analysis is that pregnancy is not actually entirely a physical condition. By not covering those costs, the state exacerbates the poverty of women in society, a poverty that is related to the financial burdens of childcare that women disproportionately face (Colker 92). The main problem is that a family or a single woman cannot afford a second or a third child. If pregnancy requires a woman to make a large sacrifice and one which she is not willing to make it is morally permissible for her to terminate the pregnancy. It could, of course, be objected that the kinds of sacrifices a woman might ultimately be required to make by giving birth could be avoided by her allowing the unwanted child to be born. They include financial considerations, a desire to limit family size (from one other child to many others), that they are unmarried, that the lover-or-husband does not want a child, that a child would wreck a fragile relationship with the man or make the relationship permanent, fear of birth defects, because of parental pressure, that they are too young or too old, and (strange though it may sound) even that they love children too much to bring one into the circumstances of their world. Among the very young, however, it may be safely speculated that age itself is an influential factor in abortion decisions (Stetson 32). Some women get abortions because they do not want to have a child at that time in their lives. Informal surveys of counselors at abortion clinics and pro-life organizations reveal that the reasons women offer for not wanting a child vary enormously.
Spiritual considerations are important for religious families believing in Gods providence and destiny. The pro-life perspective conceives of the individual woman as an extended figure. A woman is part of a set of mutually beneficial obligations that individuals have to each other (Stetson 23). The joys and pains of childbirth are well documented. Viewing pregnancy as the fulfillment of beneficial obligations requires a stress on joy instead of pain. The Good Samaritan roleroughly, rendering assistance beyond that which duty requiresstresses the painful character of pregnancy. In both roles, however, the individual woman is an extended figure. The private figure of pro-choice gives way to the individual who merges self-interest with the interests of others (Stetson 99).
Public Sociological Imagination
Public is split in the expected ways on this issue (pro-life firm in their belief that the fetus has the moral status of a human being, pro-choice holding to the conviction that human being-ness comes about later in time). Pro-life advocates are as one in their beliefs about the origin of life, while pro-choice people disagree on the point of origin and are also inclined to dismiss the question as not vital to their own position. Pro-lifers march in step with each other on the bottom-line view that human life begins at conception. Pro-choice advocates agree that a human being is not present at conception, but their views are scattered on when human status is achieved and where morality enters abortion decisions (Abortion Statistics 2006). In order to investigate public situation, it is important to take into account statistical results and abortion trends. The pregnancy rates go up as the socioeconomic status goes down. It is not clear that abortion rates increase with lower socioeconomic status. In a study of Rhode Island, a state with a predominantly white and Catholic population, 56 percent of all pregnancies in teenagers at the highest socioeconomic status ended in abortion, while only 22 percent of pregnant teenagers living in poverty areas got abortions.
Best estimates are that the greater number of poor women who get pregnant at least evens out these percentages, so that the number of abortions among poor teenagers equals, perhaps exceeds, those among more affluent teenagers (United States Abortion Statistics n.d.). In New York State, the highest abortion rates among pregnant women occur in girls under 15 and women over 40. More abortions, however, are obtained by women in their twenties. Thirty-five percent of all abortions in the United States are performed on women in the 20 to 24 year old age group, another 20 percent on women in the 25 to 29 year old group. Given this, it is difficult to avoid the impression that the ongoing abortion debate is as much a matter of disagreement of religious dogma as it is of moral values. Abortion is usually viewed as both a moral and a legal problem. In this instance, morality and legal law have vitally interdependent roles to play in ensuring the realisation of just outcomes. Common questions which both law and morality attempt to answer include: Who, if anyone, ought to be permitted to have an abortion? Under what circumstances or conditions might abortion be allowed? Generally speaking, there are roughly three positions that can be taken on abortion: a conservative position, a moderate position and a liberal position (Abortion Statistics 2006).
According to the conservative position, abortion is an absolute moral wrong, and thus something which should never be permitted under any circumstances not even in self-defense, such as cases where a continued pregnancy would almost certainly result in the mothers death. A common concern among conservative anti-abortionists is that, if abortion is permitted, then respect for the sanctity of human life will be diminished, making it easier for human life to be taken in other circumstances. Arguments typically raised against abortion here are almost always based on the sanctity-of-life doctrine (Stetson 92). Whether human beings do in fact have a natural right to life, and whether fetuses are in fact human beings, are matters of on-going philosophical controversy. Thus, following (Colker 49):
Societys failure to provide decent housing, nourishment, and healthcare to all of its citizens may seem as unreasonable to poor people as poor peoples failure to use condoms may seem to middle-class people. Society needs to respect the lives of poor women by giving them real options to escape the cycle of poverty. When society offers poor women such respect then society can expect to receive respect in return (49).
Abortion is permissible provided that it is procured during pre-sentience (i.e. before the fetus has the capacity to feel). Since a fetus cannot feel, it cannot be meaningfully harmed or benefited. Thus, as with other non-sentient or pre-sentient entities, it makes no sense to say a fetus has rights, much less a right to life. In the case of post-sentience, Abortion may still be justified on carefully defined grounds, namely: self-defense (for example, where the life or health of the mother would be at risk if the pregnancy was allowed to continue); or unavoidability (for example, where abortion cannot be avoided, such as in the case of pregnancy or accidental injury). Abortions performed on lesser grounds are unjustified (Kramlich 783).
Since fetuses are not undisputed persons, they do not have the same rights not to be killed as do actual undisputed persons. Thus, in the case of life-threatening pregnancy, at least, a womans right to life overrides that of the fetus. If women are not permitted to have abortions, the community might find itself deprived of the beneficial contributions that a woman freed of the burdens of child rearing would otherwise be free to make (Kramlich 783). There are also cases in which others stand to benefit from the pregnant womans bearing a child, and that this too might contribute to the communitys benefit. The bottom line of this position is that abortion is morally permitted in some situations, and might even be morally required in others, and it is not morally permitted in some other types of situations. Colker underlines that:
When poor people also act in ways consistent with those majoritarian values by not valuing the length of their lives, we should not be surprised or look to poor people to change. We need to change the social fabric in which we all live, in which we all fail to value life and choice for poor people (Colker 49).
In other words, it is one thing to be human in the genetic sense, but it is quite another to be human in the moral sense. These two senses are quite distinct, and care must be taken to distinguish between them (Cleland and Marston 6). The consequence of this is unavoidable. It has yet to be demonstrated that the genetic humanity of fetuses alone qualifies them to have fully-fledged membership of the moral community. A fetus is not a person. It is nothing more than a newly implanted clump of cells. In defense of this claim, she argues that a fetus is no more a person than an acorn is an oak tree. The analogy can be extended further to show that, just as stepping on an acorn is significantly different from cutting down an oak tree, so too is aborting a fetus significantly different from killing an actual person (Colker 112).
Personal Opinion
I suppose that the mother has a right to control her body and lifes circumstances. It might be claimed, for example, that a womans right to choose her lifestyle, career, economic circumstances, standard of health, and similar, override any claims the fetus might have to be kept alive (Colker 88). The mother may then withdraw her life support even if this means the fetus will die in the process: an unfortunate, but nevertheless unavoidable, consequence. Against this, it might still be claimed that the inconveniences and other psychological, physical or social ills caused by an unwanted pregnancy are still not enough to justify killing the fetus and violating its right to life (Cleland and Marston 6). The demand not to kill the fetus becomes even more persuasive when it is considered that there are alternatives available for helping to prevent or alleviate the ills of unwanted pregnancies, such as child welfare and other social security benefits, adoption, counseling, medication, or, as some have suggested controversially, even extracting the fetus and placing it in a surrogate or an artificial uterus. (It should be noted that this latter suggestion is not as far-fetched as it seems. Work is already being carried out overseas on maintaining uteri extracted from women outside of a womans body, and implanting embryos into these wombs. The mother might, for example, contemplate getting pregnant for the sole purpose of growing tissue which can be harvested and transplanted into her brain or pancreas in an attempt to restore her health (Colker 72).
The most obvious is the fetus and the mothers common claim to a right to life. This is particularly so in cases where the mothers life would almost certainly be lost if the pregnancy were allowed to continue. In such situations it seems reasonable to claim that the mothers right to life must at least be as strong as the fetus right to life. It is difficult to see how anyone could reasonably and conscientiously choose an outcome which would see both the mother and the fetus die. Furthermore, as has already been discussed elsewhere in this text, morality does not generally require us to make large personal sacrifices on behalf of another, and thus it would be morally incorrect to suggest that the mother has a duty to sacrifice her life in defense of the fetus (Colker 98). In the case of life-threatening pregnancies, then, it seems reasonable to conclude that the pregnant womans right to life has the weightier claim. This means that society will invariably encounter moral disagreements in abortion contexts many of which may not be able to be reconciled. The discussion has also warned the nursing profession that it cannot afford to be complacent or indecisive about taking a formal position on policy formulation in relation to abortion practices and procedures and the questions of social justice these raise (Stetson 92).
I suppose that the central issue of the regulation of abortion practices is whether abortion is, or can be assimilated to, homicide. The paths to this central issue are marked by strong arguments against state regulation of abortion. There are also strong arguments against government regulation of abortion practices even when the minimum test of direct physical harm is met. The right to control ones own body and the location of the unborn individual in the body of another render abortion a type of action that today is normally shielded from state regulation. The shield cannot insulate individuals from state regulation if abortion counts as homicide. For homicide is a clear instance of those actions any state must regulate. The most cogent test to use in determining whether the state ought to regulate abortions is the capacity of the unborn individual to suffer harm. In simplest terms, one cannot harm those who cannot be harmed (Stetson 88). But even if, as seems likely, some zone for exceptions can be carved out of the dialogue, the main area of disagreement will not be touched by this appeal. Indeed, after allowing for that small number of exceptions that some pro-lifers accept life of the mother, pregnancies from rape or incest the disagreement between the two individuals remains substantial (Stetson 72).
Conclusion
Abortion is like no other issue in its capacity to enlarge our moral and political perspectives. From personal standpoint, abortion is moral ad permissible because it allows a woman and a family to decide its destiny and life path. At the center of abortion disputes is this question: Many extended and poor family are not supported by the government and women have to make abortion to avoid financial burden and poverty. Abortion should be permitted in a variety of exceptional circumstances, when for example the womans life is in danger, on the grounds that even the highest moral rules have limits. From public standpoint, abortion benefits the society because undesirable children become a real burden for society and tax payers.
They join the army of poor and criminals. There were numerous difficulties involved in formulating and applying precise criteria of personhood. An entity does not need to have all five attributes described, and that it is possible that attributes given in criteria are sufficient for personhood, and might even qualify as necessary criteria for personhood. Given these criteria, all that needs to be claimed to demonstrate that an entity (including a fetus) is not a person is that any entity which fails to satisfy all of the five criteria listed is not a person. Abortion is the only possible way to control population growth and avoid the army of poor and unemployed. These facts show that abortion is the only possible decision for many women to avoid undesired pregnancy or health risks caused by pregnancy. Many poor families and single mothers cannot afford a second or a third child unable to support a new born. Abortion is often considered an immoral act, but it is the only possible decision to save happiness of a family and womens health.
Works Cited
Abortion Statistics 2006. Web.
Cleland, J., Marston, C. Relationships between Contraception and Abortion: A Review of the Evidence. International Family Planning Perspectives, 29 (2003), 6.
Colker, Ruth. Abortion & Dialogue: Pro-Choice, Pro-Life, and American Law. Indiana University Press. Bloomington, IN. Publication Year: 2002.
Kramlich, M. The Abortion Debate Thirty Years Later: From Choice to Coercion. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 31 (2004), 783.
Stetson, D.M. Abortion Politics, Womens Movements, and the Democratic State: A Comparative Study of State Feminism. Oxford University Press, 2004.
The Last Abortion Clinic is a film documentary that aims at evaluating the legislative aspects of abortion in Mississippi. Set in the state of Mississippi, the documentary aims at highlighting the laws that have been passed to curtail access of abortion in this state. By the time the film was being set, there was only one clinic left in the state that openly offered aborting. Subsequent Antic choice laws have made it very hard for the citizens of the state to access abortion services. In addition, operating clinics can now offer abortion. The first law set against abortion required that all clinics be registered under the state law as surgical centers.
The 24 hour waiting period was introduced, within which time women who needed abortion could accessing counseling services, among other laws. The result is that the laws have significantly affected the way in which reproductive health is approached and viewed. They also have an outright intention of trying to overturn Roe vs. Wade, a monumental ruling by the America Supreme Court that legalized controlled abortion (The Last Abortion Clinic, n.d.).
Increasing laws to restrict access to abortion in the state of Mississippi have had notable consequences. They have complicated the issue of abortion to the extent that it is now impossible to have a single law that sufficiently covers abortion. Furthermore, such laws as Roe vs. Wade have invalidated all laws that limit abortion in the first trimester. However, the undue burden law that allowed the control to determine whether the pregnancy is an undue burden means that many of the women that would have aborted ended up giving birth as it took too long to establish the undue burden proof.
These laws have also had political implications. They have divided the country down the middle, with pro life supporters on one side and pro choice supporters on the other side. The abortion debate is so intense that there are grassroots networks in all states that pressurizes and influences the direction of local politics. Furthermore, women from Mississippi who wants to have abortion have to travel outside the state to procure it with poor women being hit the most by the economically as federal government has subsequently withdrawn financial support to abortion.
Reo Vs Wade has also changed abortion politics forever. The issue is not seen as just a matter of ending a pregnancy but also as life (babys) Vs. Life (mothers). The counseling process for pregnant women seeking abortion required that the women be shown the ultrasound image of the unborn baby. Further more it other issue emerged such as the effects and the trauma that abortion has on women and their right to be informed of these repercussions before abortion. Abortions politics are also used by the electorate to test the level of conservativeness or liberalness of those seeking public office (Lewis, 2011).
Abortion cannot be ignored since it is a mater of public concern. There are reasons why women seek to procure abortion. Currently, many of women who need abortion get it from unqualified and unprofessional sources. There is thus dire health repercussions involved in unprofessionally done abortions. Many women suffer physical injuries, while many die in the process. It is estimated that maternal mortality due to abortions is about 13%. All these consequences is because their no good public health policy that sufficiently over abortion. Preventing such consequences can only be addressed by incorporating abortion as part of public health policy (Berer, 2000).
Reference List
Berer, M. (2000). Making abortion safe: A matter of good public health poly and practice. World Heath Organization. Web.
The Abortion Divide aired on The Frontline PBS channel shows how the opinion gap between abortion and anti-abortion support has continued to widen from the 1980s to date in Darby Pennsylvania. This documentary takes Darby Clinic as the case study. The producer and the co-producer, Obenhaus and Leiter respectively acknowledge the significant efforts demonstrated by pro-life advocators who persistently assemble outside Darby clinic daily confirming increased division between abortion and anti-abortion supporters over time.
The Opinion Gap Between Abortion and Anti-Abortion Support
The initial phase of the documentary mentioned above, affirms that although the bitterness within the abortion divide is not conspicuous the division is significantly visible. This film contrasts opinions about abortion suggested by both pro-choice and pro-life groups. For instance, the pro-choice advocators believe that pregnant women should not be viewed as incapable of making choices concerning abortion and therefore term government regulation as hypocrisy. On the other hand, pro-life supporters argue that performing or supporting abortion portrays barbarism in the modern-day world. One of the chief pro-lifers says, Its barbaric to chop a baby up, put it in a little canister, take it out and count the pieces. Thats what they have to do. What kind of world have we entered into, where we do this to our children?
The divide depicted in the film also emanates from different beliefs between pro-choice and pro-life supporters. As a result, pro-choice views a fetus as an undifferentiated tissue, and therefore the mothers decision to get rid of the fetus should not be a problem. In contrast, pro-life believes life begins immediately after conception and thus views a fetus as a living person. Therefore, pro-lifers believe that pregnant women should not by any means contemplate aborting as that equate to the murder of a person with a soul and a heart.
Undeniably, The Abortion Divide film adequately shows the gradual growth in differences between the pro-choice and pro-life supporters but fails to bring a solution to the moral problem of abortion. Obenhaus and Leiter used women from the Darby Abortion Clinic (Pro-choice supporters) and the Amnion Pregnancy Crisis Center (Pro-life supporters) to bring out the contrasting views concerning decisions upon the discovery that one is pregnant. From the interviews depicted in the documentary, viewers become aware of the mixed feelings that mothers develop upon realizing they are pregnant. The feelings shown in the film are significant contributors to the final decisions made by pregnant women concerning keeping or aborting the pregnancy. At this point, viewers get to understand the moral reasoning behind pro-choice supporters and pro-life supporters.
For example, The Abortion Divide film portrays a scene that poses a challenge to pro-choice supporters. The scene depicts Rose, a single mother of eight children where five are already in foster homes, and two live with her sisters. Additionally, Rose, also affirms that she is destitute and currently resides at a facility for the homeless and that she recently recovered from a drug addiction problem. However, in spite of all the challenges, she is undergoing she was happy to keep the pregnancy of her current newborn son whom she is determined and committed to raising and living with. This woman says, Now were trying again. Hes pretty specialaint nobody taking this one. According to Rose, she does not believe in abortion and this belief revolves around her entire family.
A contrasting scene to that illustrated above comes when a woman named Christine, who looks approximately 30 years visits the abortion clinic. Additionally, Christine looks financially stable, well-educated, and married. However, when she learns that she is pregnant with twins, she feels embarrassed and shows the outright unwillingness of keeping the pregnancy. Christine says, When she said that they were twins, I wasnt prepared for that at all. I didnt even consider the possibility. As a result, Christine claims she considers aborting the twins because her son suffers from non-specific autism and does not like human interactions. Moreover, Christine admits that she did not expect to conceive she had unprotected sex only once. She says, Surely, one time, Id get some kind of a grace period on that. Christine wishes luck for the twins in the sense that they will make peace with her decision of aborting them. She imaginatively holds a conversation with them saying, Thank you, and Im honored to be given this gift of life. Unfortunately, I cant do it right now. Unfortunately, Christine never gave the twins an opportunity to make their side of the decision.
Relevance of the Documentary to the Class
The moral issue of aborting has been a contentious debate for several decades in America. Unfortunately, American society has failed to reach an agreement on what pregnant women should do. For quite some time in the history of America, the government had been quiet on the issue thus leading to increased abortion cases (Krutz & Waskiewicz, 2021). In efforts to reduce and hopefully end abortion in America, an anti-abortion movement came to life to push the government to enact laws that regulate abortion. Additionally, the pro-lifers have made significant strides to curb abortion such as establishing facilities such as The Amnion Pregnancy Crisis facility illustrated in the film The Abortion Divide. Therefore, this documentary significantly contributes to enlightening learners on the historical divide concerning abortion and its current status. Additionally, the film illustrates the relative nature of moral decisions as it shows that what one considers to be moral can be immoral to another.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the documentary film The Abortion Divide provides learners with several lessons to learn. For instance, through this film, it is apparent that the decision to abort a child comes from several reasons all of which are valid regarding their rights. In as much as people would want to criticize abortion as a social vice, sometimes women make decisions out of love, or coercion from their spouses or members of their social circles. However, women who believe abortion is inhuman, do not consider abortion as an option regardless of their plight. As a result, learners can simply understand that the issue of what to do with pregnancy heavily relies on the mother.
Reference
Krutz, G., & Waskiewicz, S. (2021). American Government 3e.
Abortion has been a topic of discussion for a long time due to the controversial views about it. Many philosophers and thinkers have been arguing the reasonableness of abortion, and they still cannot find one common conclusion that would allow to justify or to prohibit such an act. Marino (2010) considers the different points of view and designs a situation from which one can conclude that abortion can be allowed under certain circumstances due to a persons right to life.
Essence
Marino (2010) argues that even though the fetus can be considered a person, it does not mean that abortion is impermissible as opponents of abortion require an individual to take responsibility for the unborn child. A scenario in which a person wakes up attached to an unconscious violinist who has a fatal kidney ailment is shown in the chapter. The violinist can survive only if the individual does not leave a bed for the next nine months and stays attached to the violinist; otherwise, the violinist will die (Marino, 2010). It is fair to notice that the person should not be obliged to agree to such terms; however, considering that each human has the right to life, the person who can save the violinist may be morally obliged. Considering an individuals right to life, no one can decide what happens to the body expect the person itself.
Therefore, there is another situation in which a mothers life is in danger due to pregnancy; hence, she has an equal right to life. Even though many arguments lead to the opinion that murder is intolerable, the mothers self-defence position should also be considered.
One can conclude that the mother has a right to decide what to do with her body, as she is a person with rights. Even though she carries a home for another person, she owns the womb, which gives her the right to decide. Consequently, an unborn childs right to life cannot outweigh the mothers right to life. He concludes that the right to life is accurate if there is a reason to be killed unjustly. However, in the case with the violinist, killing him can be justified due to the persons individual rights.
Abortion can be considered as an unjust killing if the fetus is treated as a person with equal rights. Marino (2010) also presents a case of an unplanned pregnancy, stating that the person cannot be protected from external circumstances that can occur. Different situations are shown in which abortion should not be justified. By looking at the case where the person needs to spend only one hour in bed for the violinist to save his life, unplugging him can be considered as an immoral action. However, a sinful act cannot be called unjustified as the person can be self-centred and callous. Therefore, the person is not obliged to stay connected to the violinist no matter how much time needs to be dedicated to saving violinist life.
Conclusion
The important notice is that Marino understands the varieties of opinions and how they can be argued. He does not deny a potential situation in which abortion seems to be an immoral act. For instance, if an individual has taken all the precautions against not having a child, they may refuse to have a child if that implies a large responsibility that the person is not ready to carry. Therefore, Marino recognizes a variety of situations and standpoints from which abortion can be looked at, and encourages following a common sense.
Reference
Marino, G. (2010). Ethics (Modern library classics). Web.
In modern times, abortion is one of the most discussed topics in society. There are numerous arguments in favor of and against this highly controversial topic, and it continues to be one of the key points in political debates. In order to clearly express the argument, Judith Thomson has created a thought experiment that aims to depict the moral dilemma of abortion and the burden of carrying a baby. In this essay, I will discuss the relevance of Thomsons Violinist experiment and provide parallels between it and abortion.
The case that Thomson presents to the reader poses an ethical question that aims to show the obligations and restrictions that pregnancy places upon women. I believe that, while there are some flaws in the situation that is compared with pregnancy, it draws an excellent parallel with pregnancy. It shows that a pregnant woman is being deprived of her fundamental rights due to the number of limitations an unborn baby places upon its host. In both the hypothetical case of the violinist and pregnancy, a person has no obligation to remain complacent with the situation in order to satisfy the needs of an otherwise doomed organism.
Thomsons violinist is based on a series of parallels between her thought experiment and pregnancy. I would like to discuss the similarities of this case, which, in my opinion, provide a reasonable explanation that women must have a choice in this matter. For that matter, it is necessary to assume that a fetus has the same rights as any other person. As the kidnapped person has the right to freedom, so does the violinist who is plugged into the system the right to life. A mother forfeits a significant portion of her rights as well, but with an added issue that there are no guarantees of her safety and good health. In both cases, the unwilling participant forfeits a significant part of his or her rights to prevent the death of another organism. The question arises as to where it is reasonable to sacrifice one persons rights, although the real-life dilemma has a number of additional factors worth considering. Not only was the decision made for her, but the mothers right to life is also being threatened by the fetus. Moreover, the burdensomeness of the presented processes of healing another person or bearing a child is more complicated than staying healthy for nine months.
Due to the fact that a person is forced to be plugged into the machine along with the violinist, the case bears more resemblance to rape incidents that lead to impregnation. As the person that was kidnapped did not sign up to the obligations that were put upon him or her, it is not morally wrong to oppose being kept as someone elses life support. In the case of willing coercion that led to impregnation, the argument becomes more difficult, as it is harder to put parallels with the case of the violinist.
Even if the focus is taken away from the severe cases of unwanted pregnancy, the issue persists. Carrying an unwanted pregnancy is no different from being kidnapped, as the mother is forced into the circumstances she did not choose. A number of demands that arise from pregnancy are difficult to uphold, and the mother must be willing to satisfy them. Abortion opponents do not consider these factors as the legitimate reasons for abortion, albeit potentially being morally worse, such as drinking while being pregnant (Crummett, 2019). If a mother is not willing to comply with these demands, abortion is a more ethical choice over having to carry a fetus while not complying.
There are arguments against the usage of the violinist case as an example of the decision-making process of a pregnant woman. It is hard for a person to link the act of unplugging a tube from oneself with extracting an unborn fetus due to the direct and indirect interaction with the subject (Knobel, 2019). However, since the result of these two actions is the death of another person, it is not unreasonable to use Thomsons Violinist to compare these two actions.
Another argument that is often used during abortion arguments stems from the claims that a fetus, as a person, has a right to life. Simkulet (2018) claims that a right to life does not give one the welfare right to use anothers body (p. 13). The researcher argues that if people will consider an unborn child as a person, then a fetus has the right to ignore another persons rights to bodily integrity (Simkulet, 2018). Shortly speaking, it must not be permissible for any other human to have any rights over another humans body.
A third argument against the case to be used as an analog to pregnancy is that the violinist is not related to the person who is being plugged into the system to save another life. While this is true that maternal instincts play a crucial role in abortion decisions, abortion is caused by the burdensomeness of pregnancy that overweighs the will to help another organism to survive (Crummett, 2019). The choice to let the fetus stay intact signifies the intention of its mother to form familial relationships with the person, but it is not an essential part of the otherwise altruistic decision.
There are additional considerations for people who are pro-life and argue against abortion due to natures intent. The evolution of medical technologies and the accumulation of knowledge leads people to be less confined to the binary options that are discussed in this paper. Block (2018) states that the current developments will allow a woman to choose a compromise between these two extreme positions (p. 3). Evictionism is a developing technology that aims to provide a fetus with sufficient conditions to develop in the same way it would inside a womb, making Thomsons violinist obsolete (Block, 2018). While this technology is not yet finished, I believe that both sides should be equally satisfied with this middle-ground solution.
In conclusion, I believe that Thomsons Violinist is a highly relevant pro-choice argument, as it allows the person to examine pregnancy as a highly demanding task that places harsh restrictions upon a pregnant woman. Most of the moral obligations that apply to the case are similar to pregnancy, although pregnancy has a number of additional complications that are not taken into consideration by the thought experiment. A number of issues that stem from controlling womens bodies only contribute to the health issues of the population, to the point where it might be more harmful to leave a fetus intact. Anti-abortion arguments can be satisfied in the future by technology, however, nowadays, they present a threat to womens bodily integrity.
References
Block, W. E. (2018). Judith Jarvis Thomson on abortion; A libertarian perspective. DePaul Journal of Health Care Law, 19(1). Web.
Crummett, D. (2019). Violinists, demandingness, and the impairment argument against abortion. Bioethics, 34(2), 214-220. Web.
Knobel, A. (2019). Rethinking unplugging. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine, 44(6), 698-711. Web.
Simkulet, W. (2017). The parenthood argument. Bioethics, 32(1), 10-15. Web.
