APPLIED ETHICS, ABORTION

ABORTION

            Abortion is rife, controversial and contentious and has invoked a host of contributions from various fields of human endeavour. The above characteristics of abortion is based on the facticity that the discussion of the propriety or impropriety of abortion tantamounts to discussing the value of the human person, right to life, the sanctity of human life, contraception, feminism, gender roles, teen pregnancy, and sexual morality.

            Hence, abortion is defined as the loss of fetal life or the termination of pregnancy. Through this process, the fetus is ejected or extracted from the uterus before it becomes viable, that is, before being sufficiently developed to the point of continuing its life outside the womb or uterus. It is also defined as the voluntary or involuntary termination of a pregnancy at whatever stage of its development. But in all of these, the loss of life is involved and this constitutes the thrust of abortion. Abortion may be induced (purposeful) or natural/spontaneous (miscarriage). It could also be deliberate and therapeutic.

            Direct deliberate abortion is a scenario where someone intentionally, directly or deliberately terminates a pregnancy. Involuntary abortion is what is called miscarriage and this occurs at the period of the first trimester (first three months after conception). Involuntary abortion is unintentional and non-deliberate.

            The debates on abortion is usually centered around induced abortion which is the deliberate, unjust, direct and voluntary taking or terminating of innocent life, in which case, the violation of its right to life is the center of focus. Two prominent official advocacy groups have emerged concerning abortion. Their major concern is hinged on the moral worth of the fetus, that is, the fetus’ presumed right to life and the pregnant woman’s right over her body. The abortion debate is in 2 parts, which are two schools of thought, viz, The Pro-life and Pro-choice.

The Pro-life Activists

            The pro-life activists are those who hold the opinion that life is sacred. They defend the dignity of human life and thus hold that life from conception to birth is sacred. The human person thus possesses a right to life that is inviolable. They believe that the government has an obligation to preserve all human life, regardless of intent, viability or quality of life. They are also referred to as anti-abortionists and hence profess their discountenance for legal or illegal abortion.  Abortion for pro-lifers is immoral at any period of gestation and is morally non-permissible.

The Pro-choice Activists

            The pro-choice activists are those who speak in favour of abortion. They also believe that individuals have unlimited autonomy with respect to their own reproductive systems as long as they do not breach the autonomy of others. Abortion is permissible for them because what is aborted has not yet attained rationality or self-consciousness.

THE BEGINNING OF PERSONHOOD

            The debate here seeks to know when the embryo/fetus actually becomes a human person. The beginning of personhood is about determining the moral status of a fetus.

Pro-life position argues that:

1. The fetus actually becomes a person from the moment of conception to birth.

2. As soon as fertilization takes place, there is immediate ensoulment (immediate animation).

3. The fetus is a full-fledged human person that is still undergoing growth to the point of being viable, and though it is in the womb, it is still alive as a separate individual.

4. All human beings have the right to life at any given point in life whether born or unborn.

5. Being a human person, the fetus has a full moral status, and as such, has the right to life which is sacred, and ought to be respected and protected.

6. The mother’s life is as viable as that of her unborn child, and termination of such life is homicide.

7. The pre-born child has a heartbeat by the end of the third week.

8. The point at which rights of personhood should be granted is not something we know or don’t know. It is something we decide. We grant rights to people we value and deny them to people we don’t value.

The pro-choice position

1. For them, the fetus is not yet a viable human being, and thus has not yet attained rationality.

2. The fetus is merely a cluster of cells or blob of tissue, and not a baby or person because it is not conscious or self-aware.

3. Ensoulment takes place within the third trimester (here the zygote groups into the fetus) and this is called delayed hominization. Hence, anything done to it before the fetus is permissible.

4. Biological life may begin at conception but we do not know when personhood begins.

5. The preborn child does not have enough size to feel pain, viability or self-awareness to be granted rights of personhood, and to this last point, the pro-lifers answer that such qualities develop over time. For pro-choice activists, ensoulment is indeterminate.

CLUSTER OF PROPERTIES THAT CHARACTERIZE A PERSON

Pro-choice position

            Mary-Ann Warren is prominent here and she avers that although the fetus is a biologically human organism, yet, it is not a person. For her, only persons have rights such as right to life. Hence, she outlines a cluster of properties that characterize a person to aid the distinction between persons and biological humans. The properties are:

Consciousness: This property has to do with the capacity to feel pain.

Reasoning: This is the developed capacity or ability to solve new and relatively complex problems.

Self-motivated activity: The ability to act independently from genetic and external control.

Ability/capacity to communicate: Ability to communicate different kinds of messages with indefinite number of possible content and topics.

The presence of self-concepts and self-awareness.

            For Warren then, the possession of this five properties confer personhood on whoever. The non-possession of none or one of them, denies personhood on whoever. Since the fetus has just one (consciousness), it is not a person and so lacks the right to life and can be exterminated.

The pro-life position:

            The anti-abortionists raise two analogies to object the claims of Warren.

The first is the comatose patient objection which claims that patients in coma do not satisfy all of Warren’s criteria especially consciousness, and should lack the right to life. But this is not practiced.

The second is the infanticide objection which claims that infants below one year of age lack some of the criteria, and thus, should be accounted non-persons, and this would permit both abortion and infanticide. But this, is also not practiced.  Hence, pro-lifers advocate that since the embryo has in itself the genetic propensity or natural capacity to develop these qualities under the right conditions, therefore its right to life begins at conception.

THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF CONCEPTION

Here, the debate is on whether abortion is permissible due to some circumstances.

The pro-life position:

            They argue that abortion is not permissible under any circumstance at all, be it rape, incest, by even poor or non-existent birth control. The pro-lifers hold that even though the circumstance of conception is unpleasant and immoral, it does not warrant the extermination of the fetus, since, it is a person with right to life.

The pro-choice position:

            They asserverate that abortion is morally right when certain circumstances like rape, incest, poor or non-existent birth control are involved. Hence, such circumstances of conception can extenuate the moral culpability of abortion. Since a woman’s right has been tampered, even if the fetus has a right to life, it can be exterminated.

THE ALTERNATIVE TO ABORTION

            Here the basic debate is on whether adoption is a viable and fair alternative to abortion.

The pro-life position argues that:

1. Instead of abortion that deprives the fetus of a viable future, it can be given the right to life by allowing it to be adopted after birth.

2. Poverty should not be a reason for abortion, since the child can be adopted.

3. Adoption can be a viable and fair alternative since there are people who are willing to adopt the infant and keep it alive.

The pro-choice position:

            While some pro-choice activists share this view, others rule out the consideration of adoption, but insist on the permissibility of adoption if the pregnant woman so chooses.

For them, the woman has the right to her body especially when she is passing through poverty, pain, suffering, and the psychological torture of unprepared (or unwanted) pregnancy.

THE LIMITS OF GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY/INTERVENTION

            Here, the basic concern is to address the question of to what extent a government is to be allowed to interfere with a woman’s reproduction?

The pro-life position argues that:

1. Because a fetus is a person, abortion violates its constitutional rights.

2. Because the right to life is more important than the right to privacy, the government should protect the fetus’ right to life rather than its mother’s right to privacy.

 3. A government that permits abortion to a woman except for self-preservation is equivalent to permitting women to commit murder.

The pro-choice position argues that:

1. The fetus is not a person and the government has no duty to protect its life as it has no moral standing.

2. That abortion is a private medical decision that cannot be made by the government.

That government intervention to stop abortion is an infringement on the right of the pregnant woman.