Introduction
In the present day, the legal and social attitude to women’s right to an abortion may be regarded as a highly controversial and hotly debated question. Pro-life and pro-choice supporters provide multiple arguments in support of their positions. While pro-lifers believe that abortion should be prohibited as an unethical and morally wrong practice, the proponents of the pro-choice state that women should have a legal and moral right to decide what to do with their bodies. Nevertheless, regardless of the essence of ethical principles, they cannot be applied equally in every situation. Thus, the purpose of this analytical paper is to present arguments in order to demonstrate that women should be provided with the right to an abortion as a personal choice, however, this privilege as an ethically right action is not available in any situation.
Discussion
One of the main disagreements between pro-life and pro-choice supporters refers to the attitude to abortion as killing. On the one hand, having a human genetic code, the fetus that lives inside the mother should be regarded as a human. In addition, this organism is alive and developing since conception. Birth may be regarded as a relocation regardless of the fact that a premature fetus cannot survive outside the mother’s body (Thomson 47). At the same time, calling the fetus a human may also be regarded as a “slippery slope argument” as it cannot be applied to similar examples (Thomson 47). For instance, an acorn cannot be called an oak tree even if it can transform into it in the future. Nevertheless, in relation to a human being, it is challenging to draw a line in his development according to which the fetus may be regarded as a person. At the same time, it is senseless to deny that the fetus has been alive since conception and it “has already become a human person well before birth” (Thomson 48). In this case, an abortion may be defined as an intentional killing, however, in certain cases, it is justified.
The voluntary involvement in intercourse in relation to responsibility for pregnancy is a controversial topic as well. On the one hand, people should realize the consequences of their actions. On the other hand, forcing a woman to keep a child is the same as forcing her to allow a burglar who climbed into an open window to stay inside (Thomson 58). Being responsible does not presuppose an agreement with consequences. In particular, when both partners take all necessary measures for protected intercourse and pregnancy nevertheless occurs, an abortion should be morally justified. In turn, when a woman voluntarily indulges in unprotected intercourse, being aware that pregnancy is a highly possible consequence but plans an abortion in advance – this behavior cannot be defined as ethically right.
At the same time, the concept of intentional killing creates barriers to an abortion when pregnancy and giving birth may be dangerous for a mother’s health and life. According to pro-lifers, the voluntary death of one person is preferable in comparison with another person’s killing (Thomson 58). At the same time, both people involved are innocent and have a right to live. In addition, in the case of a serious threat, a person has a right to self-defense as well, and there is no ethical issue in his actions. Moreover, it is necessary to remember that a woman does not get pregnant, being aware of serious complications that may occur in the future – thus, she has no intention to kill the fetus. In this case, an abortion to save a woman’s life is ethically right. In turn, when a woman has an abortion, especially a late-term one, without any threat to her health, and knowing that a child is already a human person who will die, only to avoid the cancellation of her vacation trip – her action cannot be defined as ethically right.
For pro-life supporters, the right to life for the fetus prevails in any circumstances of pregnancy regardless of the level of its undesirability for a woman. For instance, rape is not regarded as a viable reason for an abortion as the fetus is not guilty of the way in which it was created. Although this argument has a reasonable ground, as the fetus cannot be responsible for anything, a woman cannot be regarded as unjust for refusing to keep it (Thomson 58). It goes without saying that the decision to sacrifice her life is connected with a woman’s moral virtues, however, she has a right to choice and cannot be blamed for pursuing her own interests.
Pro-life arguments are strongly supported by religious institutes that perceive abortion as murder – thus, a sin. At the same time, these arguments are generally detached from reality as they do not consider that an abortion as welfare for one person may cause devastating consequences for others. Living in inappropriate conditions, a woman who does not have a right to an abortion cannot provide a better future either for a child or herself. In this case, pro-life supporters justify decisions that may be violent and unjust for people. At the same time, the pro-choice position is not the pro-abortion position. Instead, it is a more realistic approach that emphasizes the significance of choice depending on life circumstances.
Conclusion
To conclude, it is essential to repeat that the principles of ethics and morality cannot be applied equally in every situation. At the same time, it is incorrect to state that an abortion is ethically right. It is senseless to deny that the fetus is alive since conception, has a human genetic code, and may be regarded as a human being before birth. In this case, its intentional extraction from a woman’s body, taking into consideration its inviability, is killing. However, under specific circumstances, it cannot be regarded as morally wrong. In general, a woman is also an innocent human being who has a right to life and a right to decision-making. If she decides to have an abortion, it does not necessarily mean that this procedure is her genuine desire but not a life-related necessity. In addition, a woman cannot be responsible for involuntary consequences. Thus, when a woman is involved in protected intercourse, but pregnancy occurs, was raped, or has a serious threat to her health and life associated with giving birth, her decision to have an abortion is ethically justified. However, when a woman pursues her egoistic interests and perceives abortion as a common practice instead of taking responsibility for her actions when it is possible – her decision to have an abortion cannot be ethically justified. All in all, women should have a right to an abortion, however, it should be executed reasonably depending on life circumstances.
Work Cited
Thomson, Judith Jarvis. “A Defense of Abortion.” Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 1, no. 1, 1971, pp. 47-66.