The liberal view • Liberals say that abor3on is permissible because all and only actual persons have...

Question

The liberal view • Liberals say that abor3on is permissible because all and only actual persons have a serious right to life • Note: 1) This is not to say that non-persons have no rights; or that they have no claim to life, merely a less serious one 2) This is compa3ble with gradualism: the view that, as the foetus develops psychologically, it acquires greater intrinsic moral standing; and abor3on becomes a more morally serious maLer The liberal argument Premise 1. Only beings that are actually persons have a serious right to life Premise 2: A being is a person only if it is self-conscious —“only if it possesses the concept of a self as a con3nuing subject of experiences and other mental states and believes that it is itself such a con3nuing en3ty.” (Tooley, ‘Abor3on and Infan3cide’ p. 44.) Premise 3. No foetus is actually a person Conclusion. Therefore, no foetus has a serious right to life An unpalatable consequence of the liberal view • If self-consciousness is the criterion for personhood, then newborn infants do not have a serious right to life since they are not self-conscious • If abor3on is morally acceptable, then so too is infan3cide Intrinsic versus “all things considered” wrongness • What follows from the liberal account of personhood is that abor3on and infan3cide are on a moral par as regards the intrinsic wrongness of killing (i.e. ignoring side-effects) • It does not follow that they are necessarily morally equivalent all things considered, for side effects may differ crucially But… • This s3ll seems somewhat unpalatable: It follows that it would be worse to kill someone’s beloved pet cat than secretly to kill an unloved newborn infant that nobody would miss The dilemma • Is there any way of avoiding this unpalatable conclusion? Is there a point, somewhere between concep;on and birth, where we can plausibly say that a developing being acquires a serious right to life? • “The problem the liberal encounters is essen3ally that of specifying a cutoff point which is not arbitrary: at what stage in the development of a human being does it cease to be morally permissible to destroy it?” Tooley, p. 38 Foetal Development Concep6on: Sperm penetrates egg. First trimester: 1-14 weeks The embryo at 3.5 weeks By week 7: all essen3al organs have at least begun to form. Foetal Development Foetus at 10 weeks, 3.2” •Foetus achieves human form By week 12 the foetus can make a fist with its fingers Second Trimester: 14-28 wks Foetus at 13-16 weeks, 6” •The fetus makes ac3ve movements •At 20 weeks ‘quickening’ occurs (the mother can feel the foetus moving) Foetal Development • Weeks XXXXXXXXXX, 15” • the foetus has a hand and startle reflex (spontaneous movement) • Rapid brain development • nervous system developed enough to control some body func3ons (sen3ence?) • a baby born at this 3me is poten3ally viable (may survive outside the womb), but the possibili3es for complica3ons and death remain high • Third trimester: 28-40wks • At 36 weeks has a high chance of survival, but may require some medical interven3ons. Considered full-term at 37 weeks Possibili3es a) Conception (conservatives): It is seriously wrong to kill an organism, from zygote on, that belongs to the species Homo sapiens. b) Attaining Human Form c) Quickening - capable of spontaneous movement d) Sentience - capable of feeling pain e) Viability - capable of existing ou

David · Accepted Answer

1
                        Is Abortion permissible, In What Circumstances                      
Introduction: 
Abortion implies termination of pregnancy by removing foetus or embryo from uterus 
through surgery or other intervention. The provision for abortion has been an ever-
burning issue of discussion that whether abortion is permissible. In fact, abortion has 
been used since the time immemorial as means to control of leaping rate of population 
and the races being considered 'inferior' in region or society. Besides, it has also been 
used to curb an increase in population of people with hereditary defects and 
complications from having children to run the family of defected and 'unproductive' 
members.  Albeit, it is permissible in some special circumstances, however, the same 
is being regarded as one of the most serious criminal offenses as well as threat to 
human rights in global and legal systems if committed illegally.  
 Permissible /Justifiable Circumstance for Abortion: 
(i.) Issues of health of mother: Abortion could be permitted for the safety of physical 
and mental health of the mother in prospective life. 
(ii.)  Impact of crime: It can also be permissible when conception and pregnancy have 
resulted from crime, for example, rape, child abuse, incest and other kind of 
psychopathology of the offenders or victims.  
(iii.) Impending disability to child: Abortion is duly permitted when the 
prospective child is likely to have and lead a kind of ‘unacceptable quality of life’ 
including serious hereditary defects, physical and mental problems and handicaps 
after birth. For example, The Abortion Act of United Kingdom does allow its 
people to terminate pregnancy at any point of time if there is any evident or 
2
definite risk of disability to the prospective babies. Otherwise, it can be permitted 
during the first six months of pregnancy as the same could be substantially risky 
or life-threatening for mother in the last trimester of pregnancy.  
(iv.) The ‘People seed’ analogy (Thompson, 1971): It has been designed to argue in 
the favour of abortion and advocated that the same could be permissible to be 
completed at the earliest in case of failure of contraceptive measures being taken 
by the mother. Otherwise, too much delay or negligence could result in claim for 
the foetus to get the shelter in mother’s womb and post-natal life as well for future 
sustenance, development and survival.      
(v.)  Social reasons of abortion: There are some social factors working as potential 
reasons for abortion. These reasons include poorness and indigence, inability of 
mother to cope up with the newborn baby, tender age for motherhood to cope up with 
the newborn etc. But, often provisions for abortion due to social factors are not widely 
acceptable. 
(vi.) Matter of national policy: In addition, the decision of the national government 
may also incorporate abortion as a robust part of national policy which may include 
abortion as means of regulating size of national population, facilitating and improving 
quality of life of population, as well as, a source of regulating various groups of 
population.  
(vii.) Means to control of childbirth and disabilities: In early stages of pregnancy 
abortion is a better substitute for contraception towards birth control. Usually, 
abortion is opted after the first week of pregnancy in clinical supervision with least 
risks to mother. In some of the societies it is preferred very deliberately as means of 
controlled regulation of size of populace within the country. For example, in 1965 the 
3
UNO Conference revealed that abortion was the most important and common method 
of population control in those days. Albeit, the doctors’ community do argue and 
heartedly support abortion as part of national policy for contraception and population 
control; and asserts that people of a country should plan for birth control and must 
allow their females to terminate their unwanted pregnancies for national welfare. 
However, in the western world, most of the people do not extend support to abortion 
to be carried out as part of national policies. 
On the contrary, some western proponents of ethics are dead against of this argument 
that abortion should be permitted if the baby is likely to suffer from any kind of 
disabilities. They advocate that such permission to abortion is an offensive decision 
and negligence to persons with disabilities contributing to national productivity 
through their own possible ways.

The liberal view • Liberals say that abor3on is permissible because all and only actual persons have a serious right to life • Note: 1) This is not to say that non-persons have no rights; or that they...

Solution

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

Submit New Assignment