Home » Abortion » The Implication of Abortion

The Implication of Abortion

Because of gender equality, incest and/or rape, economical factors, and the fact that abortion affects women disproportionately, abortions should not be banned. According to all of ethical belief and basic rights of a women to choose for herself as to whether she want the obligation of being a parent should be her choice. While it cannot be said whether an abortion is an unforgivable event, it is of course an unforgettable event. An abortion plays havoc with the psychology and the future life of the entire family. The woman who has lost her child, at any time between the pregnancy, will never be the same.

While the woman may be the hardest hit by an abortion, one also has to think about the mental and emotional state of the entire family (D’Silva,2007). If a women is faced a dilemma of whether to have an unwanted pregnancy because of lack of adequate funds to take care of a child with the basic needs of life that should be her choice to terminate that pregnancy. Sometimes as my friends confessed to why they chose to have an abortion was that they had a choice of having to bring shame on their family, and not wanting to leave school because of making a dreadful mistake.

According to Bonnie Steinbeck ; the implication of abortion is that it is not seriously wrong to kill a non-conscious, non-sentient fetus where there is an adequate reason for doing so, such as not wanting to be pregnant. She began by presenting briefly the view of moral status that she takes to be correct, that is the interest view. The interest view limits moral status to beings who have interests and restricts the possession of interests to conscious, sentient beings (Waller p. 268).

Steinbeck argues that to focus on the so-called elective abortions that those women who chooses to avoid the burdens of child-rearing, pregnancy, and childbearing. Most opponents of abortion say that abortion is wrong because it is the killing of an innocent human being. They see no morally relevant difference between an early gestation fetus and a newborn baby. The question, then ,is whether an early gestation ( or simply “fetus” as I will say from now on) is morally equivalent to a new born baby. This seems to me completely implausible.

By contrast, the first –fetus cannot think, feel, or perceive anything. The interest view is general theory about moral status, but it has implications for the morality of abortion. During early gestation, fetuses are non-sentient beings and, as such, they do not have interest. Scientist do not agree on precisely when fetuses become sentient, but most agree that first-trimester fetuses are not sentient. The reason is that, the first trimester, the fetal nervous system is not sufficiently developed to transmit pain messages to the brain (Waller p. 69). A. Robinson ( personal interview, January 25,2010) My question to Alicia was what was her reasoning for having an abortion, she replied that during this time in her life while trying to complete college and having thought about how her life would be with a child had definite consequences for her. Most surely her parents would be very hurt, and the shame she felt especially not knowing the outcome of the relationship she and her boyfriend at the time. My question was how did she make this decision and how hard was it to live with?

Alicia said that decision has haunted her until this day, however she did decide that her education at the time was more important than having that unwanted pregnancy. In summing up our interview she said if she had it to do again she probably would do the same thing however she would take better precautions as far as her birth control. She also realized that she took a chance that she had a choice to do the right thing for her life. Even though, today Alicia doesn’t have any children of her own she loves children and have several God-Children. The women’s liberation movement sees abortion rights as vital for gender equality.

They say that if a woman is not allowed to have an abortion she is not only forced to continue the pregnancy to birth but also expected by society to support and look after the resulting child for many years to come (unless she can get someone else to do so). They argue that only if women had the right to choose whether or not to have children could they achieve equality with men: men don’t get pregnant, and so aren’t restricted in the same way. Furthermore, they say women’s freedom and life choices are limited by bearing children, and the stereotypes, social customs, and oppressive duties that went with it.

It is a black-or-white issue for those who believe abortion is murder. Unlike the courts, which recognize variables such as a woman’s health or the circumstances under which conception took place, the pro-life movement condemns all abortions. And that is their constitutional right. The ability to peacefully assemble, express an opinion and petition the government for redress of grievances is not limited to either the pro-choice or pro-life movement. Rape and/or Incest and abortion According to Munson; ” Who believes that we need to deal with the fetus morally whether to abort or not.

We are told that performing the abortion would be directly killing the child, whereas doing nothing would not be killing the mother, but only letting her die. Moreover, in killing the child, one would be killing an innocent person, for the child has committed no crime, and is not aiming at his mother’s death” ( p. 69-80). Lockhart suggests that we should “perform actions that we are maximally confident are morally permissible. ” Translated into ordinary language this says that where we have to make a moral choice we should take the course of action that we are most confident is morally correct.

For example: A mother believes that it is morally permissible to abort the fetus she is carrying because tests show that it will have a serious disability. The mother believes that she should take the course of action that she is most certain is morally correct. She is certain that it is always morally permissible not to abort a fetus since she has some doubts (even though they are small doubts) as to whether an abortion in this case is morally permissible, she should not have the abortion.

In most cases a person who follows this doctrine is likely to decide against having an abortion. Women’s rights argue in favor of abortion. Here are some of the women’s rights arguments in favor of abortion: • Women have a moral right to decide what to do with their bodies • The right to abortion is vital for gender equality • The right to abortion is vital for individual women to achieve their full potential • Banning abortion puts women at risk by forcing them to use illegal abortionists

There are countless stories of women who had to make the hard decisions of aborting a pregnancy (without the input of a man). Whatever the reasons, nine times out of ten it usually is economical. An unwanted pregnancy could more times than not cause shame or guilt on the woman involved. Dropping out of school is usually not an option if the parents are financing the college education (in some cases the parents don’t know). Even though we have come a long way in society regarding shame, by that I mean “anything goes”, there is still a stigma in some families who are very involved in the church.

Fornication is voluntary sexual intercourse between a man and women who are not married to each other(. “Abortion affects women disproportionately Abortion is an important element of women’s rights because women are more affected by the abortion debate than men, both individually (if they are considering an abortion) and as a gender. Pregnancy has an enormous effect on the woman involved. As Sarah Weddington put it to the US Supreme Court in Roe v Wade: A pregnancy to a woman is perhaps one of the most determinative aspects of her life.

It disrupts her body. It disrupts her education. It disrupts her employment. And it often disrupts her entire family life. And we feel that, because of the impact on the woman, this is a matter which is of such fundamental and basic concern to the woman involved that she should be allowed to make the choice as to whether to continue or to terminate her pregnancy. According to philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson: “a great deal turns for women on whether abortion is or is not available.

If abortion rights are denied, then a constraint is imposed on women’s freedom to act in a way that is of great importance to them, both for its own sake and for the sake of their achievement of equality; and if the constraint is imposed on the ground that the fetus has a right to life from the moment of conception, then it is imposed on a ground that neither reason nor the rest of morality requires women to accept, or even to give any weight at all”(1971). Many people regard the right to control one’s own body as a key moral right.

If women are not allowed to abort an unwanted fetus they are deprived of this right. The simplest form of the women’s rights argument in favor of abortion goes like this: In summary: • women need free access to abortion in order to achieve full political, social, and economic equality with men • women need the right to abortion in order to have the same freedoms as men • women need the right to abortion to have full rights over their own bodies (including the right to decide whether or not to carry a fetus to birth) – without this right they do not have the same moral status as men.

Public policy debates ignited by special interest groups often lend more heat than light to issues. (Sanger, M. ) The US Supreme Court decision in Roe v Wade, which gave women a right to abortion (under certain conditions) is seen by many as having transformed the status of women in the USA. As stated by Kathryn Kolbert (1992 ), American abortion law owes much of its present form to the case of Roe v Wade in 1973. ” This landmark decision… not only protects rights of bodily integrity and autonomy, but has enabled millions of women to participate fully and equally in society.

The important US Supreme Court decision in Roe v Wade to some extent supported that view when it ruled that a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy came under the freedom of personal choice in family matters and was protected by the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution(1973) In Roe v Wade the Supreme Court held that a pregnant woman has a constitutional right, under the Fourteenth Amendment, to choose to terminate her pregnancy before viability as part of her freedom of personal choice in family matters (1973).

Marquis, although arguing a radically different position, was found to be equally disappointing. One still wonders what exactly makes such presentations “ethical. ” One must wonder what imperative can be derived from the fact that I don’t want my future to be eliminated in the face of a person that finds some “good” reason to end my life. It may be true that we don’t want to have our futures destroyed and that such a fact can be applied to fetuses that have not yet developed their nature to the point of consciously “seeing” that fact.

In my opinion, such a “truth” does not provide sufficient grounds for the intrinsic worth of human life, certainly not sufficient enough for us consider such issues as human potentiality and future and see them as deeply meaningful (Rachels, 1989)”. In summarizing the issue of abortion is one that has been debated argued from many stance’s. The religious morality against abortion verses the political stance on abortion viewing the women’s personal rights to have an abortion. This argument of the point was to have an abortion or not to have an abortion. The argument for and against continue to be a heated debate.

In conclusion of this argument my stance remains to be Pro-choice to be thankful that women don’t have to go into back alleyways with illegal abortionist to have an abortion. They have the choice to have a safe, and legal procedure. References: ROBERT MCCARTNEY. (2010, January 26). Young activists boost anti-abortion side. Virginian – Pilot, B. 7. Retrieved January 31, 2010, from Pro -Quest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1947466201). (Reprinted in “Intervention and Reflection: Basic Issues in Medical Ethics,” 5th ed. , ed. Ronald Munson (Belmont; Wadsworth 1996). pp 69-80. ) Retrieved 21 January 2010 Robinson, B.

A. (1998 to 2009 ) Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. Last update: 2009-JUN-03 B. A. Robinson ] Marquis, Don “Why Abortion is Immoral,” Journal of Philosophy, vol. 86 (1989). Retrieved 21 January 2010 Hadley Arkes, First Things: An Inquiry into the First Principles of Morals and Justice, 363. Retrieved; 21 January 2010 Thompson, Judith Jarvis, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 1, no. 1 (Fall 1971) A Defense of Abortion. Retrieved 17 July 2009 Waller, B (2008) Consider Ethics: Theory, Reading and Contemporary issues 2nd ed. Longman/Pearson, Bonnie Steinbeck, (1999) Why most abortions are not wrong,

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this essay please select a referencing style below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Leave a Comment