On Abortion
I wanted to briefly address my view (as of writing) on abortion because we discussed it in my biomedical ethics class and I have put some extensive thought into the issue.
I am, of course, a male and so my view is affected by inexperience. Nonetheless, I do think it is valuable to think about morally controversial issues despite one’s ability to experience it. Especially, since my view is in line with a view that frees women from the burdens of child-bearing and child-rearing. That is for you to decide.
Argument From Body Rights
A generally held view among citizens in the West today, regarding abortion, is the “Argument from Body Rights.” It goes as follows:
- A woman has the right to do whatever she prefers to her body.
- A fetus is a part of a woman’s body.
- A woman can do whatever she prefers to the fetus, if it is in fact, her right to do whatever she wishes with her body.
Therefore, a woman may obtain an abortion.
The only issue that this Argument does not raise, from the way I see it, is whether the fetus is worth any serious moral consideration. The argument, at least, does not say why the fetus is not worth any moral consideration. If it is, in fact, okay for a woman to do whatever she wants with her body, it is also morally okay for the woman to harm herself. Surely, it is within her rights to harm herself, but that would not make it morally justifiable.
Argument From Humanness
Another argument that has gained credence in society is simple in its form, it is the “Argument from Humanness”:
- It is wrong to kill human beings.
- A fetus is a human being.
Therefore, killing a fetus is wrong.
This argument, however, fails to address non-moral characteristics.
An Argument Against Abortion: Marquis
Marquis’ core argument is that abortion is wrong because it deprives the fetus of a future of value. His argument is reminiscent of the “discontinuation account” & “desire account” which claim that abortion is wrong because they (1) discontinue the potential for valuable experiences, and (2) deprives a victim of a future they desire.
This argument form, however, is invalid. It takes form as the “Potential Persons Argument” and goes as follows:
- It is wrong to kill some with a future of value (FoV)
Therefore, it is wrong to kill someone with a potential FoV.
Significant Fetus Developmental Points
To be able to have a constructive discussion about these points, it is important to start from the same premises. So, we should agree on the science on early lifespan development, especially in the womb.
Here are some facts, then:
Germinal Period
- The germinal period lasts from conception to 2 weeks, after which twinning is no longer possible.
Fetal Period
- The neural tube begins to form after 17 days.
- The heart begins to beat at 3 weeks.
- At 6 weeks, the embryo shows the 1st signs of the development of the thalamus and cerebral cortex. This is what we associate with consciousness.
Embryonic Period
- 8 weeks to 40 weeks
- This is the period of growth and nervous system development.
- 30 weeks: 1st fetal learning, plasticity occurs, with vary basic conditioning.
- From 22 to 34 weeks, the brain and body start forming functioning connections.
- Birth: 40 weeks
Brain development continues at a fetal rate for another year.
My Argument for Abortion
Consider this moral conundrum, as presented by my philosophy professor, Dan Ryder, in my Biomedical Ethics class at UBCO:
Mellisa and Joseph are Considering Having an Abortion
Melissa and Joseph are both 47 years old and have been happily married for 24 years; their only child has gone away to university, and they were looking forward to a new chapter in their lives. However, they have just received a shock after Melissa visited the doctor about what she thought were odd perimenopausal symptoms, including unusual weight gain: she is 23 weeks pregnant! Due to the onset of perimenopause including extremely irregular periods, Melissa did not realize that pregnancy was still possible and the couple had not been using any birth control. Pregnancy past age 45, without the use of fertility treatments, is indeed quite rare.
Melissa has a low paying but highly rewarding career working for a non-profit organization, and Joseph is precariously employed. Having a child at this time would be financially infeasible for them, and would wreak havoc on their ordinary work and home life, not to mention the fact that the “new chapter” they envisaged with just the two of them is completely shattered. Besides, looking after a baby is exhausting, and neither of them feels up to it. Another consideration is the increased risk, both to Melissa and to the fetus. A 47 year old pregnant woman is at greater risk at the best of times, but Melissa’s other health conditions mean that there is a 1 in 20 chance of serious complications for either her or the infant, though only a 1 in a thousand chance that they will be life-threatening to Melissa. In their jurisdiction, adoption is illegal as well as impossible to arrange via “extra-legal” channels. (This strange legislation was brought in ten years ago, due to some distressing abuses that raised the ire of the populace.) Adoption is simply not an option, however, abortion is perfectly legal.
As a result, they are contemplating whether Melissa should have an abortion, but they are worried about the advanced stage of the pregnancy. Would it be seriously morally wrong, they wonder?
One Way to Defend This Argument
I would like to argue that an argument from well-being is persuasive enough to provide a moral framework where abortion may be permitted.
That argument is as follows:
1) One ought to do that which produces the greatest well-being compared to any alternative action, for all concerned.
2) The alternative actions available to Melissa (and Joseph) are a) to continue with the pregnancy and have the baby, or b) to have an abortion.
3) Option (b) produces a greater amount of well-being overall because the amount of well-being accruing to the child in its life is outweighed by the suffering incurred by the rest of the family (and others).
4) Therefore Melissa ought to have an abortion.
5) Doing what one ought to do is morally permissible.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Therefore it would be morally permissible for Melissa to have an abortion.
My Defense of This Argument:
My defense of premise #3 (arguably the most contested premise) comes from my understanding that the most moral action to consider in assessing the given thought experiment in Assignment 2 is by carefully calculating the consequences that the given action, mainly abortion, results in. In other words, the deciding moral principle in what constitutes good for Melissa, Joseph, and the fetus is the greatest amount of good for the most number of people that are involved. If we agree that consequentialism is the most accurate moral framework to analyze this moral dilemma, then we can start looking at how Melissa, Joseph, and the fetus will be affected by the legal choice of abortion.
To weigh the consequences, we should first and foremost consider the life of Melissa since the decision to abort the baby affects her the most because of the biographical life she is already experiencing. The fetus is not yet alive and has not yet had experiences. One can argue that the potential for experience provides the fetus for the right to live but that, surely, does not outweigh the biographical life that Melissa already has. Furthermore, we can statistically predict that some level of suffering is inevitable for Melissa and her family. We know that, as a 47-year-old woman, there is a 1 in 20 chance that she or the infant will suffer health problems.
We can also assume that because of the precarious nature of Joseph’s work and low-income that Melissa receives from her non-profit position, that the infant will have to be raised in poorer conditions, adding mentally strenuous circumstances to the family house-hold which will directly affect the mental health of everyone involved — including the infant.
Purely from calculative speculation, which as I mentioned above, should be the deciding factor in evaluating abortion because it allows for a case-by-case analysis, we can safely conclude that aborting the fetus is the most ethical action available for everyone involved.
I plan on updating my view on abortion and adding things to this blog post/ document throughout my time in academia and perhaps even longer. So, if you have any comments or further guidance please let me know. I’ll be sure to add them to the “final draft”.
Before you go…
🗣 I love connecting with fellow thinkers. Find me on Twitter, Facebook, Goodreads, or Instagram.
I’d love it if you’d share the article on Facebook/TWITTER if you want your friends to benefit from it in some way at all.
I write to keep you thinking and to keep me thankful and reflective. Cheers and until next time,
keep reflecting.
