Paste your essay in here…The controversy surrounding the ethicality of abortions has been a hot debate topic during the past several decades. In the Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade, the Court ruled that women have the constitutional right to seek abortions. Heated disagreements and different perspectives have led to the creation of two different movements: the prochoice movement and the prolife movement. After long years of a debate, a definitive answer is yet to be found. Since ancient times a wide variety of methods have been used, with the earliest recorded abortion being around the 12th century. In many ancient temples and drawings there are depictions of a demonic figures performing an abortion in what seems to resemble hell. This clearly indicates that the people living during this time thought that abortion was an unethical practice. Thousands of years later we are living in a society where this act, that was once thought to be morally unjust, is legal in all 50 states.
It seems like a view of relativism has been adopted regarding this topic, in which an act is ethically permissible based on the majority opinion of a society. In ancient times, abortion was viewed as an ethically impermissible act, yet today, thousands of years later the same act is allowed. Although many disagree with abortion, the majority believe that it should be allowed, thus making it a legal act in the United States. In both cases the decision of whether abortion is permissible is not based upon determining if it is right or wrong, but a societal opinion. This view of relativism has many issues, including the violation of law of non-contradiction and not being able to account for moral progression. In order to put an end to the redundant ongoing debate about abortion, a definitive answer of whether it is right or wrong must be declared. To achieve this, the idea of relativism must be abandoned and one must adopt the view of realism. The view point of a realist believes that there is a definitive answer to whether acts are ethically permissible or not. In other words, an act can be ethically permissible or not regardless of what people think. As a realist, I think that abortion is not ethically impermissible, in most cases, yet should remain legal.
Philosopher Judith Jarvis Thompson provides thought experiments which are supposed to draw a parallel between her scenario and abortion. In “A Defense of Abortion,” Thomson utilizes several examples and variations to support her claim. Her example of the violinist portrays a scenario where you wake up and find the Society of Music Lovers has kidnapped you and connected you to a transfusion machine, which they connected also to a famous violinist’s circulatory system to keep him alive, all without your consent. Furthermore, Thompson states, the violinist suffers from a fatal kidney ailment, and you alone have the right blood type to support him live and save his life. He only needs your assistance for nine months to save his life. After nine months, his recovery will be complete and you can resume your normal life. According to Thomson’s analogy, you have the choice to either remain connected to him for the whole nine months or disconnect yourself from the machine and let the violinist die. From these details, it can be determined that Thomson’s analogy is meant to describes an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy. The big question here is whose choice prevails as to whether or not the violinist lives or dies? This example highlights the question of whether woman have the right to choose whether to terminate an accidental or unplanned pregnancy or not. Many people think that the kidnapped person would have the right to disconnect themselves, but that would mean that abortion is permissible if the analogy was parallel. There are many flaws in Thompson’s analogy. A key difference I notice is that the violinist is a complete stranger to the woman. A stranger and an unborn baby are two completely different things. The unborn baby has a much more significant relationship with the mother than a person she has never met. Thompson should have used the woman’s own child to make a better parallel between the two scenarios.
There is not an easy answer when it comes to abortion because of the variety and complexity of scenarios. No thought experiment can accurately encompass all the aspects of abortion to result in an easy answer. In my opinion, abortion due to lack of protection or accidental cases have an easy answer, but things get complicated in situations of rape or health concerns. It is common knowledge that pregnancy is a consequence of sexual intercourse. Before one commits the act, they very well know there is a chance that they can get pregnant. If one is willing to engage in the act of sex they should be willing to accept the consequences that it entails. Every action has a reaction, and in most real-life cases you cannot just run away from a consequence. For example, if I have a big exam and choose not to study for it I am going to get a bad grade. I knew the repercussion of not studying, but still chose to not to. The result is a bad grade, which I am stuck with. Women can make the choice to have sex, yet do not have to deal with the repercussions if they do not want to. When the mother is healthy, I believe she should choose to carry the child to term, and if she does not want the child, she should place it for adoption. For a healthy woman, the sacrifice or a mere nine months, as illustrated by Thomson’s violinist analogy, is a small price to pay to give an incredible gift to someone who desperately wants a baby and cannot have one physically. Also, you never know what the mother will think once she actually sees the baby. My mom was only nineteen when she had me and initially contemplated abortion. Obviously, she decided not to do it despite being young and scared she made the decision to own up to her choices. She loves me no less and fell in love with me the moment I was born. I believe it is worth it is to carry to full term because you never know how a woman’s feelings will change, and if not the option of adoption is always available.
In cases of rape, I do believe that abortion is ethically permissible based on the views of utilitarianism if it is done in the first trimester. After the first three months of pregnancy the unborn baby has developed far too much to be able to commit this act in a humane manner. If committed in the earliest stages, I believe it is ethically permissible because it maximizes happiness. In this scenario, the woman did not agree to the act of sex, but was forced. Rape is a traumatic experience that causes long term mental issues in the victim, that could be worsened by carrying the child of the perpetrator for nine months. A utilitarian believes that acts are ethically permissible if they maximize happiness and reduce pain. If a woman was forced to go through a pregnancy after rape it would likely inflict mental pain for nine months. Once the baby is born, the child may not be loved in the same way most children are, thus causing the child to endure mental pain as well. On the other hand, if the woman got an abortion it would save her from the mental torture ensued by carrying the child and prevent a child from living a life of mistreatment, thus maximizing happiness. In cases where a mother will die or have extreme health effects, the same view applies. Happiness would be maximized by the abortion because it saves the mother’s life and saves a child from having to live without their mother. Although in these two special cases I believe that abortion is not ethically permissible, the majority of abortion cases that take place are due to lack of responsibility. Each of these cases violates both Aristotle’s golden mean and the natural rights theory. The golden mean states that the most desired option is between that of two extremes. In the case of abortion, the abortion itself would be one end of the spectrum while keeping the baby would be another. Giving the baby up for adoption seems to be the happy medium between these two options. The mother does not have to take care of the baby and the baby gets to live. By giving the baby up for adoption many families lives can be changed for the better. Many women have heath issues that make them infertile. These women would do anything to have a baby. By carrying out a pregnancy rather than having an abortion, a woman is ensuring the happiness of other families that are less fortunate. Abortion seems to be selfish in this aspect, because you are putting your own happiness above changing the lives of others.
Although my opinion on abortion is very clear, I think that it should remain legal. The issue of whether something is legal and whether it is ethical are two separate questions. Although our law tries to uphold ethical practices, it is not necessary. Abortions are currently legal and have been for a long time. In 1973, the history changing decision in the Roe v. Wade case made abortion legal in all states. If abortions were made illegal it would cause many problems as a result. Just because it will be illegal, does not mean it will not take place. Women who want an abortion will go to extreme measures, whether it is legal or illegal. It is much safer to have a legal abortion than to use unlawful methods. In many cases women can be badly injured from an illegal abortion due to lack of a proper doctor and medical supplies. If making abortion illegal would ensure no one would try to perform them other ways, it would be a great solution, but unfortunately that is not the case. By keeping abortions legal, it does not mean that they are ethically just, it simply ensures that they are carried out in a safe manner.
As long as women continue engage in intercourse, abortions will continue to take place. Fortunately, the number of abortions each year has been declining due to the advancement of medicine, and birth control and sex education being taught in schools, at home, and as part of primary care medicine women today have more information about practicing safe sex. Emergency conception, the morning after pill, and the abortion pill, will all reduce the number of invasive abortions needed. Although currently legal, abortion will always be a matter of moral and ethics. There will always be individuals who do not support abortions, and there will always be others who do. As I stated earlier, there is no simple solution to the abortion dilemma. We are a nation governed by laws, and the right to allow the termination of a pregnancy is within the law of the United States of America no matter how you or I may feel about it. My views on abortion are very complex, but besides cases of rape or heath emergencies, I believe that abortion is ethically impermissible. What if that fetus could have gone on to find the cure to cancer or be the president. Unfortunately, no one will ever know because women’s rights prevail over a helpless unborn baby. Despite believing that the act is ethically impermissible, I surprisingly think it should be legal to ensure the safety of the practice. This debate is very complex and has many different factors to take into consideration, as seen throughout this paper. The question of the ethical nature of abortions will continue to be asked for many years and a clear answer may never be established.