A Critical Approach in Evaluating the exceptions to Abortion The Issue of whether Abortion should be considered morally and lawfully right or wrong is arguably one of the most controversial issues discussed in today’s society. People provide reasons as to why they are for or against the Idea of abortion. Some people believe that abortion is morally wrong and should be outlawed.
These people however provide reasons for their articulations, like the Idea that killing a fetus Is Infanticide and that unborn children are Innocent and should not be subject to abortion due to unfortunate situations like rape or fetal anomalies (Thomson 48 ). Some people however believe that abortion should not be considered morally wrong and outlawed based on the notion that everyone that women own their bodies and so they have the right to choose what stays In It and what leaves it (Thomson 48).
Judith Jarvis Thomson in The Defense of Abortion takes a critical approach in evaluating the reasons presented by those in opposition to abortion. Thomson does this by providing different analogies in other to show that there are cases where abortion Is necessary. This case can also be applied to Roseanne Mukluk’s position on the issue of abortion as a result of early detected fetus anomalies. Mistake holds the position that abortion due to fetal anomaly is considered a form of discrimination against persons with disability (Mistake).
Meticulousness his claim by comparing abortion of fetus with disabilities with abortion due to selection against female fetus (Mukluk). However, It Is Important for people to understand that taking an extreme position in either supporting or opposing abortion posses another issue on TTS own. This is because there are situations whereby abortions are necessary and at the same time there are reasons why it is not necessary. With this notion, I believe that it Is reasonable to take a position that would consider these exceptional situations whereby abortion is necessary.
With this however, I believe that abortion should be made illegal but should be performed in exceptional cases where it is absolutely necessary. Hence, in this essay, I would argue In support of Thomson and claim that we should be take a critical approach by being more considerate to extreme cases like rape, life-endangering situations, and acute disabilities detected in the baby. This in opposition to Mistake’s claim is significant as its takes a critical approach to evaluate situations whereby abortion should not be seen as a form of discrimination.
Thomson argues that there are life-endangering situations that call for the permissibility of abortion (47). He maintains this position by giving a scenario of a pregnant woman suffering from a cardiac condition that could result into her dying if she carries her baby to term (Thomson 50). I believe that this scenario is not plausible reason to support her point. This Is because there is an alternative option to preserving the life of both the mother and the baby.
A cesarean section can be performed to remove the baby prematurely and the baby could be kept in an 1 OFF mother and the child would be alive. However, to prove her point Thomson would have presented a scenario whereby the fetus is not fully developed up to the point where he/she can be removed prematurely and the mother was going to die within a short period of time as a result of her health issue. I believe that this scenario is justifiable and should not be considered morally wrong if the woman decides to abort the baby.
The reason is because the woman’s life is in danger, and although the fetus life is valuable as well, the mother should not be Judged negatively if she decides to abort the baby to save her own life. In considering delicate issues like that, it is important for us to put ourselves in the mother’s situation before making any conclusions. I am not saying that there are not people out there that would choose to die to save the fetus. What I am saying is that if the woman chooses to abort the baby, the society should not look down on her actions as morally wrong.
Let’s take a scenario whereby a young girl 16 years old is pregnant as a result of rape. This young girl, because of the horrible experience is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. In this situation, if she decides to abort the baby is it okay for people to conclude that aborting this baby is wrong and that she should not do it? And if perhaps abortion is made illegal is it Justifiable for her to live with a stigma that she cannot eradicate? Something that would always serve as a reminder of what she has en through?
I don’t think so It is okay if she decides not to abort the baby, but all the same if she sees it as a kind of blockade that would hinder her from recovering from her trauma, I believe that she should not be Judged negatively and she should be given the opportunity to abort without any pro-life laws against her actions. Some people could argue against my point by saying that abortion should not be an option for the girl, that there are other ways that she can recover from heat POTS without necessarily aborting the baby.
This is by all means true, there are help centers being implemented that could help people recover from their disorders but I would argue that people are different. People have different ways that they cope with their issues, some people are better at it than others. Therefore, I believe that in conditions where the woman’s life is in danger or in conditions of pregnancy due to rape women that result to abortion should not be condemned by people that are against abortion. Secondly, Mistake takes a specific approach by claiming that aborting children as a result of early detected anomalies is discriminatory.
She proves his point by stating that, “…. An act of surveillance for and selection against fetus with this characteristics are less valuable to the society, Just as the selection of female fetus sends the message that women are less valuable than men. “(Mistake) I believe that this argument presented by Mistake is a not a good argument, and does not serve as a good way to prove his point. First of all, in terms of soundness one would observe that fallacy of composition is present in the above statement.
This is true because although he is correct in the fact that intentional male fetal abortion is discriminatory, using this criterion to conclude that abortion due to fetal disability is discriminatory seems too general. The characteristics mentioned by Mistake is down syndrome, cleft lip, or a missing limb (Mistake). Basically, I feel that women that abort based on extenuating case of not be considered as a form of discrimination. I am not saying that this applies to women in all cases, of course some women abort because they are embarrassed of the detected disability in the fetus.
Some other women abort because they feel that he baby would be a less valuable member of the society as a result of his/her disability. However, some women have reasons that seem genuine to me. Financial situation is one of these reasons. Some people are Just not financially capable of taking care of their children with special needs. Taking care of a child with special needs is financially demanding. I know this especially because I have a cousin that has been on life-support for a very long time now.
Some people are not capable of providing the child with what he or she needs, along with the emotional concern that he mother is faced with because of her child’s situation. Women in this situation are not aborting because they feel the child is less valued in the society, they are aborting because they are not capable of providing for the child’s needs. Opposes to my notion may Justify their claim by saying that there are implementations in today’s society that makes it more convenient for people with special needs to be taken care of.
This is true, but there are some countries that do not have support programs to help children with disabilities. Another scenario where the woman’s action does not end the message that the disabled child is less valuable to the society is if she is told by the doctor that the fetus would die in her or upon delivery as a result of his/ her disability. I believe that if the woman decides to abort the fetus on this basis, she is not sending a message that people with disability are less valued in the society.
What if the mother’s life is in danger due to an illness and the doctor says that the baby would live on life-support for the rest of his or her life as a result of an anomaly? If the mother chooses to abort the baby is she being discriminatory against people with disabilities? I believe not. It is important to note here that my above points do not apply to all cases of disabilities, Just the extreme ones. For example a fetus should not be aborted based on the fact that the doctor that diagnosed that he or she would be born deaf.
I believe that being deaf is something that parents can endure; unlike a case whereby the doctor says that there is a 99. 9% chance that the child would be born needing life support for the rest of his or her life. It is considered discriminatory if the mother decides to abort the fetus because she does tot want to give birth too deaf child.. Basically, this issue of abortion due to disability should not be equally compared with abortion due to gender selection in terms of discrimination or not. There are exceptional cases of fetal disability that calls for women to choose whether they want to abort or not.
I believe that abortion should be made illegal and should only be performed on women with the exceptional cases. The reason is because the amount of people with exceptional cases (some of them mentioned in the previous paragraphs) is much less than the amount of people that aborts for selfish reasons. In considering people with special cases that call for abortion (as mentioned in my previous paragraphs) there should be a constitution that exempts them from the anti-abortion law. With this effect, there should be a criterion that determines who is qualified for abortion and who is not.
This is because I believe that a baby’s life is precious and should not be terminated based on meager reasons. We should be critical in our Judgments towards people that aborted as a result of extreme situations. Not all cases of abortion is immoral and anti-abortionists should earn to put themselves in the position of women going through extenuating situations like rape, acute fetal disability, and life endangering situations generally. With this claim however, abortion should be made illegal because the number of people that indulge in it for selfish reasons outweighs those that have genuine reasons.
However, there should be a criterion that considers people in these extreme circumstances making it possible for them to abort if they choose to. Till today, the issue of abortion remains controversial, however, the reasonable thing to do other Han taking the extreme position of anti or pro abortion rights is to consider that the life of the unborn baby is precious and at the same time consider that there are cases whereby aborting the baby should not be considered discriminatory.