Dominic Gathrite

Professor: Anthony Graybosch

PHIL 323z
December 8, 2014

Policy Paper
Introduction:
For many years there has been an ongoing debate over the controversy that
arises in regards to the issue of abortion. Abortion can be defined as an artificially
induced termination of a pregnancy for the purpose of destroying an embryo or
fetus (Blacks Law Dictionary 2009). Looking deeper into the issue, to be more
specific, focus will be placed on the controversy that has also been brought to
question, which is the morality of multi-fetal pregnancy reduction. Multi-fetal
pregnancy reduction is through definition a form of abortion. Multi-fetal pregnancy
is often times also referred to as selective reduction, which is basically the practice
of aborting one or more fetuses that are present in a multi-fetal pregnancy. For
example, if a woman becomes pregnant with twins or even say, quadruplets, she
can choose to abort one or more fetuses. This is often times done to protect the
health of the mother herself, and or to ensure a safer birth process lowering the risk
of birth defects for the rest of the expected children. Health and safety are said to
be the number one concern

Though the health and safety of both the fetuses as well as the mother are
held in the best interest when engaging in the practice of multi-fetal pregnancy
reduction, great controversy still arises. This is because not everyone views this as
sufficient reasoning to terminate a potential life, which in effect brings the morality
of this practice to question. Many arguments against multi-fetal pregnancy
reduction are expressed on the basis that it is in a sense the murder of an innocent
growing child. Though multi-fetal pregnancy reduction is practiced within the first
trimester of the pregnancy, those opposing the practice view it as murder just the
same, regardless if it s done during the first trimester, or if the fetus/child were to
be terminated post birth. Throughout this paper, various theories and beliefs will be
described and applied to the controversy over the morality of multi-fetal pregnancy
reduction. This will allow the reader to gain a better understanding and gather a
variety of views that can be applied to the issue at hand. The primary focus will be
placed on the reduction of the number of fetuses that a woman is carrying to then
be analyzed in regards to the risks, through various forms of criticism.
Current Policy:
Here in the United States of America, dating back to the late/mid 1990s, all
forms of abortion have been generating controversy. Prior to 1973, when the Roe v.
Wade case was held, participating in the practice of abortion was a crime against
the law. This would also include multi-fetal pregnancy reduction as a form of

abortion. What the Roe v. Wade case was based on was the belief that forbidding a
woman from obtaining an abortion, if necessary, was in fact unconstitutional
(1973). The Supreme Court ruled through legislation that the abortion decision and
its effectuation were to be left up to the judgment of the women and her attending
medical physician. This legislation should also apply to the same moral
justification to multi-fetal pregnancy reduction. Furthermore, after gaining such a
vast amount of attention and recognition from the public, the Roe v. Wade case
lead to the rise of organizations that provide assistance with pregnancy issues to
those in need. One of the most widely known organizations that provide assistance
with pregnancy including multi-fetal pregnancy reduction is Planned Parenthood.
The United States of America is not however, the only country that supports
abortion. In fact, outside nations even have what many would view to be an even
more extreme point of view on the matter. As seen in the case study Americas
Baby Bust by author Jonathan Last, the laws regarding children in China state that
families are only prohibited to birth one single child. In the case of a possible
second child, the fetus is expected to be terminated. In order for this not to take
place, there would have to be extreme measures that must be taken in order to
grant an exception that allows the birth to carry on and take place. This however,
represents the fact that there is acceptance of multi-fetal pregnancy reduction
further than just the United States (Last 2013).

Facts:
Often times, what happens when discussing the morality of multi-fetal
pregnancy reduction, individuals are not aware of the facts regarding the matter. As
stated earlier, the multi-fetal pregnancy reduction procedure is done in the interest
of the health of both the mother and fetuses. The likelihood of a woman having to
undergo the multi-fetal pregnancy reduction procedure is extremely slim. Only
about one to two percent of women will have to undergo this procedure, many of
which are caused by fertility drugs. This is due to the fact that fertility drugs are
used to increase the likelihood of woman becoming pregnant, which often times
increase the risk of complications such as a premature birth in addition to multifetal pregnancy reduction (Evannes 2013). When a woman undergoes multi-fetal
pregnancy reduction, a needle is injected into the womans stomach or through the
vagina, and the fetus then injected with potassium chloride to stop the heart and
terminate the existence of the fetus (Evannes 2013). This is a decision that is often
times made because the fetus is not the preferred sex or is expected to be born with
birth defects.
Multi-fetal pregnancy reduction is never said to be a simple matter; in fact it
is seen to be a traumatizing experience due to the fact that the guilt of terminating
ones own child may begin to set in. This being understood, counseling is referred
to those seeking the procedure. This is because psychological issues can arise for

the mother after making the decision that she did not foresee to be an issue prior to
the decision. Furthermore, this same guilt can be passed down to the children or
child that is not terminated and properly born.
In some cases, children may feel that they lost their sibling and in extreme
cases, the guilt may bring them to a state of depression. As a result of discovering
the hidden truth, children can often times be lead to believe that it should have
been them chosen, as opposed to their unborn sibling to be aborted. This is seen in
the case study Two-Minus-One, where author Ruth Padawer accurately and
powerfully states, Even if parents work hard to conceal it, the child may discover
the full story of his origins, and we dont know what feelings of guilt or
vulnerability or loss this discovery might summon.
Values:
Throughout the case study Two-Minus-One, by Ruth Padawer, several
professionals and patients who have gone through the experience of multi-fetal
pregnancy reduction represent the pro-choice point of view towards the morality of
multi-fetal pregnancy reduction. Now the irony in many of the multi-fetal
pregnancy cases is that a great deal of the pregnancy issues come in effect of the
various forms of great lengths that some women go through to help them get
pregnant in the first place. This unfortunate irony is a strong factor that drives great
controversy. Through this case study, Padawer supports those who are in support of

pro-choice policy towards abortion. Padawer expresses the importance of decisionmaking being in the best interest of one future. As long as the end justifies the
means, an action can be seen as moral and acceptable (Machiavelli 2008). This is
also seen in the case when author Padawer firmly states that the underlying
premise is the same: this is not what I want for my life. This belief would be in
agreement with the ethical theories personified by Immanuel Kant in regards to
multi-fetal pregnancy reduction.
Conflicts:
The two ethical theories that will be focused on in regards to multi-fetal
pregnancy reduction are Immanuel Kants theory, and the Rule Utilitarianism
ethical theory. Now within these two theories two separate views will be applied
to the morality of multi-fetal pregnancy reduction that is left to question. With
these separate ethical theories, identifying their own points of view and
understanding of multi-fetal pregnancy reduction, we will see a conflict of interest.
Kants ethical theory in favor of, while Rule Utilitarian ethical theory would stand
to be apposed to multi-fetal pregnancy reduction.
First, lets focus on the beliefs and ideals of philosopher Immanuel Kant.
Kants beliefs state that legislation cannot dictate and rule the freedoms and
liberties of individuals. In such, Kant can be seen as an autonomist due to his
philosophical belief in ones freedom of choice. In regards to Kants philosophical

belief, an individual woman who is faced with the option to partake in a multi-fetal
pregnancy reduction, is in fact capable of making her own rational laws regarding
the matter, and proceeding to abide by it. Also, these ideals can be furthered to
addressing the laws currently in place in the United States. The United States have
done a substantial amount in terms of placing laws and regulations on abortion, so
in regards to Kant, these same beliefs must be applicable to multi-fetal pregnancy
reduction. The decision must be left up to the mother and the attending medical
physician. This exemplifies Kants strong belief in human freedom that it is
actually the first step or premise of an institutional establishment; and without
human freedom, the preservation is morality is left to chance.
On the contrary, the Rule Utilitarianism ethical theory would hold a separate
stand on multi-fetal pregnancy reduction. Rule Utilitarians favor whatever action
would pose the greatest amount of happiness versus any other option. The concept
of Act Utilitarianism can also be described as the expected pleasure or happiness of
all sentient creatures involved in the action, usually expected in the long term. Rule
Utilitarians see this to be done by following a set of rules applicable to a type of
action without exception. Applying the Rule Utilitarian ethical theory to multi-fetal
pregnancy reduction would see it as an immoral act. This is because of all of the
risk factors that can come from the procedure. For example, as previously stated,
an excessive amount of guilt can easily come from a multi-fetal pregnancy

reduction procedure. Also, one must take into consideration the complications that
come with this procedure. The mother may potentially be harmed as well as the
fetuses. These individual factors, not to mention collectively, would not provide
true happiness to those involved if any true happiness at all. This would then lead
the Rule Utilitarianism ethical theory to conclude to not support multi-fetal
pregnancy reduction.
Beliefs:
Personally, my beliefs would be pro-choice and fall in agreement with Kants
ethical theory. I believe that individuals are free to make their own decisions in the
interest of themselves and those who they deem worthy of their regard.
Unfortunately, not everything is seen simply in black and white that can then just
be regulated by a simple law, as believed by Rule Utilitarians. Many situations are
circumstantial that require further analysis to make the best decision. This would
not allow a simple law to be applicable to all situations without exception. Thus,
leading me back into agreement with Kant. It is immoral to limit ones freedom of
choice in such a way with multi-fetal pregnancy reduction. Everything has risks,
even natural birth. So multi-fetal pregnancy reduction should not be treated as a
crime and as an unsafe procedure that is to be forbidden. If done properly, and
proper precautions are taken, the procedure can easily be completed safely. The
majority of women who undergo a multi-fetal pregnancy reduction, fear for the life

and safety of both the children to be born as well as themselves. This is not a
decision that should be deprived from women. If under the care and supervision of
the attending medical physician, it is seen necessary or advised to proceed with a
multi-fetal pregnancy reduction procedure to ensure the greatest amount of safety
or satisfaction of birth, then that is what should be done.

Works Cited
Blacks Law Dictionary. Abortion. 9th ed. 2009. Accessed December 5, 2014. https://1-nextwestlaw-com.mantis.csuchico.edu
Evans, Suzanne. "How Machiavelli Saved My Family." The Wall Street Journal,
2013. Accessed December 9, 2014. http://www.wsj.com.
Machiavelli, Niccolo, and W. K. Marriott. The Prince. Waiheke Island: Floating
Press, 2008.
Last, Jonathan. "America's Baby Bust." The Wall Street Journal, 2013.
Accessed December 3, 2014. http://www.wsj.com.
Padawer, Ruth. "The Two-Minus-One Pregnancy." The New York Times, August
14, 2011, MM22.
Roe v. Wade (1973) 93 S.Ct. 705

10