Abortion

An Embyro is an unborn human, after implantation into the womb, during the first 8 weeks after conception, organs are not developed yet A Foetus is an unborn human more than 8 weeks after conception Under UK legislation, abortion is legal in the uk, In order to have an abortion under this law, you must have the consent of 2 or more doctors, and the pregnancy must be before the 24 th week However if there is a grave risk of death facing the mother, then the pregnancy can be terminated after 24 weeks, this is also the case if there is evidence for severe foetal abnormalities There are a number of arguments in favour of abortion, for example, if abortion made legal everywhere, it would cut the number of deaths from back-street abortions Babies who were not wanted often live in terrible poverty, and are deprived of many of the basic things that children need The illegalisation of abortion was seen as an example of the male domination of the legal profession, and their way of controlling women

An important issue which needs to be covered when discussing abortion is what makes a person a person, when does a foetus turn from a human being into a person John Locke defined a person as someone who is a thinking intelligent being that has reason and reflection and can consider itself as itself, the same thinking thing, in different times and places For Locke, a person must be able to view himself as an entity and understand that consequences will affect him, he must have a sense of biography and be able to recognize himself over time While Marry Anne Warren defines a person as someone who possesses consciousness, reason, self-motivated activity, communication and self-awareness While Peter Singer and Michael Tooley define a person as someone who possesses a concept of themselves as a continuing subject of experiences and other mental states When relating these principles to a foetus, it is clear to see that a human foetus has none of this capabilities, he has no sense of time, he cannot communicate, he is probably not selfaware, therefore philosophers like Singer accept abortion However a confusion arises since the same principle can be applied to a disabled man who has lost all his senses and is unable to move, should he be denied personhood aswell?

However singer would argue that the man still is a person, because he has selfconsciousness, and he says that this is what separates us from foetuses and animals, we have self-consciousness while they only have consciousness He argues that unlike humans, who when they feel pain can understand it and dwell on it, a foetus may experience pain but not understand it, the foetus has the sentience required to feel the pain but lacks the rationality and self-consciousness to make an effort to alleviate the pain or to try to understand it, therefor he is not a person The difference between a conscious and a self-conscious being is that a conscious being has the ability to perceive the environment while a self-conscious being is capable of deliberate though and action, they have understanding of themselves and have a sense of ego

Tooley offers an argument supporting abortion in his book abortion and infanticide,where he uses the principle of moral equivalence to justify it, he argues that if we offer no objections to killing sentient beings that possess physical characteristics similar to the foetus, (like a dog), then we have no reason to object abortion However this criticism faces the problem that it is very different to know the extent to which two creatures can be compared, and that human beings are very different for any creature

Act Utilitarianists regard a person as a something that is capable of experiencing both pleasure and pain Singers preference utilitarianists argue that a person is someone who can express their preferences and is a being capable of self-consciousness Kantian ethical followers regard a person as a rational, autonomous agent and an end-initself, not a means to an end DCT followers claim that a person is someone who possesses a God-given soul Aristotle and virtue ethics followers argue that a person is someone who possesses a character/personality that can be developed Human rights are also brought into the issue of the morality of abortion, a right is defined as an entitlement to do something without interference from other people, this is known as a negative right While a positive right is an entitlement that obligate others to do something positive to assist you John Locke, founder of modern liberalism, argued that one of the basic human rights Is the right to your own body, if we did not have full control of the body and be able to use it as freely as we wanted to, then we would not have a life worth living

Locke believed that we had property rights over the body, he argued that possessed our body so it could be used for self-improvement, this leads onto abortion in the following way; A women, since she has a right to her body, had an absolute right to decide what happens to it, she must consider whether or not an abortion will improve her situation, a foetus is simply an extension of her body, like one of her limbs, she can use her body as she wishes and so therefore she can decide if she wants an abortion or not However an objection is raised when arguing that you cannot compare the body to a thing like a car, although you can have a right to own a car, it is not necessarily the same as having the right to own everything in your Another objection is that what if someone is in a state of comatose and cannot do anything useful with their body, they cannot use their body for self-development and so therefore does that person lose property rights over their body? Can the doctors harvest organs from them just because they have lost this right? Another objection is raised why discussing the right to your own body and therefore the right to abortion, a right may not always be a moral good, we need to distinguish between legal and moral issues and because of this, we must use abortion sparingly as it can damage the very moral fabric of society Lastly, an objection could be that just like the mother has a right to her own body, the foetus also has a right to life, however when talking about the rights of the foetus, we must first define if the foetus is a person or not because only persons have rights However the right to life can be split up into 2, very different, individual rights; The right not to be killed unjustly, and the right to be provided with everything needed to sustain life Christians who argue against abortion do so on the basis of the sanctity of life, they talk about how every life is equally important and sacred because it is a gift from God; So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them Genesis 2:7 Objections can be raised to this standpoint which argue that the life of the mother is as sacred of that of the foetus, however the foetus is in a state of potentiality while the mother is in a state of actuality, therefore the mother needs to take priority Modern research into evolution and Darwinian theory argues that life has no real sacred value and the idea of sanctity of life is meaningless, abortion is vital as a method of controlling the population Other philosophers such as Helga Kuhse, argues that quality of life is the overriding principle when discussing the issue of abortion, they argue that human beings must have certain qualities in order to live meaningful lives, these are sentience and the ability to act

rationally, however some babies are born with such severe disabilities that prevent them from developing these qualities and so therefore, in these cases, abortion can be justified However one objection to this standpoint is that who is there to judge and assess someones quality of life, you must also take into account the effect the abortion/birth will have on the quality of life of the surrounding parties, such as the mother, family and the population as a whole For many Christians, human life begins at the moment of ensoulment, which is when the soul enters the foetus, most Christians believe that ensoulemt occurs when the baby starts developing certain characteristic features, for example, when their nervous system has been formed Aquinas believe it took place 40 days after conception, Augustine believed it was 80 days after conception, Pope Innocent III claimed it was during the 13th week of the pregnancy (when the foetus starts moving) and nowadays, the catholic church says that it takes place at the moment of conception, therefore abortions are prohibited in the church Objections are raised however because this is a view based on old knowledge that much research has proved to be false, it is based on the archaic belief of a dualist nature of the soul Also, miscarriages are natural abortions, if these are willed by God, then what does it show about the Omni benevolence of him? And even if there was a soul, how do we know when it enters the body? What if we found out that the point of ensoulment took place when the baby was 3 years old The time of ensoulment has no biological basis, through modern scientific research cant we conclude that the best time limit for abortion would be during the moment of the creation of the nervous system, since this is the point where the foetus can feel pleasure and pain