Some philosophers argue that the 'right to life' is
an ambiguous phrase. They say that it combines
two different ideas, and that it is useful to
separate them.
the right not to be killed unjustly
the right to be provided
with everything needed to
sustain life
In some
circumstances it may
be ethical for a
mother to have an
abortion to defend
herself from the
danger to her mental
or physical health that
continuing with the
pregnancy would
cause.
in practical terms it
won't, because if the
pregnancy kills the
mother it will
probably kill the
foetus too
allowing disability as a reason for
abortion implies that disabled people, or
the lives of disabled people, are less
worthwhile than the lives of "normal"
people
this will make disabled
people feel less valued
this is offensive to
disabled people
most people with disabilities say that
they would much rather be alive than
have been killed in the womb. Allowing
abortion on the grounds of disability
therefore pre-empts the choice of the
individual concerned
Section 1(1)d of the UK's 1967 Abortion Act allowed
termination of a pregnancy at any time if there was a
significant risk of the baby being born seriously
disabled. Under other circumstances abortion has to
take place during the first 6 months of the pregnancy.
Some writers argue that it is
inconsistent to support abortion if you
oppose capital punishment, weapons
of mass destruction, and so on.
In an article written in 1980, Mary Meehan
argued that if many people on the left of society
were consistent in their compassion for the
weak and helpless, and their opposition to
exploitation they would oppose abortion.
the left has traditionally wanted to protect
the weak and the helpless; unborn
children are the weakest and most
helpless, and so should be protected
the right to life underlies all other
human rights - if we protect those
rights we should protect the right to
life as well
abortion is sometimes forced on
women by exploiting partners or
families
abortion is sometimes forced on
women because society fails to
supply their needs
parents have an obligation to their
unborn children - it is wrong for them
to escape it
abortion brutalises those who carry it
out, or who are involved in the process
Abortion is wrong because it deprives the foetus of a 'future like ours'.
Marquis makes the points that: death is a
bad thing because it deprives people of all
the experiences, activities, enjoyments,
projects that would make up their future
personal life
a premature death is a bad thing because it causes the loss of future experiences etc.
abortion is not the same thing as premature
death but abortion deprives the foetus of
future experiences in the same way as a
premature death deprives a human being of
future experiences
Abortion is a bad thing for the foetus in
the same way as premature death is for human
beings,therefore abortion is as wrong as killing
people (causing their premature death)
Some people have
claimed that this
argument also shows
that contraception is
wrong, because
contraception prevents
beings having a 'future
like ours'.
Lockhart suggests that we should "perform actions that we are
maximally confident are morally permissible".
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.
a mother believes that
on balance it is morally
permissible to abort
the foetus she is
carrying because tests
show that it will have a
serious disability
since she has some doubts (even
though they are very small doubts)
as to whether an abortion in this
case is morally permissible, she
should not have the abortion
abortion is not wrong where the foetus, if born,
would be so handicapped that it would not be
capable of having any future experiences (or at
least none that it was aware of).
If you voluntarily act in a way that brings about the
existence of a person or a foetus, then you have a
responsibility to maintain the life of that person or
foetus.
a woman who willingly has sexual intercourse knows that she
takes the risk of bringing a foetus/moral person into existence
therefore the woman has a duty of
care to the foetus/moral person
therefore she should allow
the resulting foetus/moral
person to be born
therefore she should not abort the foetus/moral person
Utilitarian
Depending on the
situation will
determind whether
the abortion is the
right thing to do or
not.
Only works if it is actually
possible to asses the results of
an abortion and decide whether
they favour all concerned
Difficult because we
can't predict
consequences
Natural Law
Considers the action of abortion itself not
the consequence
Reproduction is a primary precept and
abortion goes against that
If you consider
the foetus to be a
human being from
conception, then
abortion goes
against the
primary principle
to preserve
innocent life.
Kantian Ethics
Abortion would be hard to universalise
There are so many different situations and motivations
for obtaining an abortion. All consideration of emotions
must be discarded
Abortion is an emotional decision
Emphasis on treating people
as ends in themselves and not
as means to an end.
Abortion would go against this, if the foetus is considered to be a person