abortion rights should not be restricted

profilecalane127
finalethicsessay.docx

1

Lane

Conner Lane

Dr. Yount

Ethics

December 5, 2018

Why Abortion Rights Should Not Be Restricted

In the history of this prominent country there have been several issues that women have had to fight to get rights for. There are many things that women should automatically have when it comes to rights. Voting and abortion rights have been the main two rights that women have put their blood, sweat, and tears into them getting these rights esthablished. Abortion is usually defined as the intentional termination of pregnancy. Abortions can be needed for numerous reasons. A woman should have the ultimate decision on if she is ready to have children or not. Abortion rights should not be restricted because it is a woman’s right on what she wants to do with her body, a fetus is not a person, and lastly adding restrictions will not necessarily stop all abortions.

Roe v. Wade was a groundbreaking Supreme Court case that gave women the legal right to have an abortion in 1973. In that last 15 years there have been several laws that have been passed to try and restrict this right. As a woman, the right to decide when you would like to bear a child is ultimately your own. In 2016, the movie Trapped, was released which highlighted how abortion restrictions were being enforced in Alabama, Texas, Georgia and many other states. These restrictions go directly against the Roe v. Wade decision. When it comes to the Roe v. Wade decision it is a direct reflection of Immanuel Kant’s single categorical imperative. This states, “act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” (49). Kant describes a maxim as a rule or principle on which a person acts. Therefore, when it comes to abortion if one believes that is right, why would they not want want their parents to abort them? If abortion is made a universal law then it cannot be selective to just one group of people no exceptions can be made just for one individual. Therefore, putting more restrictions would violate reason because law makers do not consider all of the motivations that a woman may have an abortion. Kant argues that motivation is what matters over consequences. So, when it comes to abortions the motive for why a woman needs one will always supercede everything. In 1973, the right to legalize abortion was made therefore there should not be any arguments on having restrictions now. Since 2010, there have been more than 250 laws that have tried to ban abortions.

The list of examples on why a woman should be able to do what she wants with her body could be endless. However, Judith Jarvis Thomson uses prevalent examples to why abortions should not be restricted and why a woman has the right to do what she pleases. Her first example is being kidnapped and plugged into a famous violinist. A famous violinist has taken ill because of a fatal kidney ailment. You are the only person who matches his blood type and because of this the Society of Music kidnaps you and connects him to your body for nine months (107). This example goes along with a woman being raped and forced to carry an unwanted child for nine months. The person who the violinist is connected to is playing the role of life support to them, just like the mother would be lifesupport to the unwanted fetus. In the example the violionist is only needed for nine months of support. However, a mother would be needed for a life time to support and guide the child.

Thomson’s next example also deals with the fact that a woman has the right to do what she wants to do with her body. She argues what if a woman is trapped in a very tiny house with a child that is growing rapidly. The child has you stuck between a wall and you will soon lose your life if nothing is done about it and the child will survive but it will be injured. There is a bystander near but the only circumstance is that you cannot choose between your life or the life of the child and no one can intervene (108). Moreover, the mother and her decision to save her life supports why a woman should have the right to do what she pleases with her body. The argument can be made that, “everyone has the right to life, so the unborn person has a right to life” (106). This example deals directly with a mother’s health and concerns over the health and life of the fetus. For example, if a mother were to be diagnosed with a heart condition and she was told that she would have kill her child in order to survive that would be her decision. Most pro-life supporters would argue that the child has a right to life. When bringing a child into the world a woman has to factor in many circumstances and situations. If a woman is not ready for these responsibilities then she should not be forced to take them on.

Abortions are one of the safest medical proceudures in the world. “Today, approximately 21 million women around the world obtain unsafe, illegal abortions each year…before Roe v. Wade an estimated 1.2 million U.S. women got illegal abortions every year, and says unsafe abortions killed as many as 5,000 of them (outside).” If more restrictions are added to abortion laws the death and injury rate for these procedures will skyrocket and more unsafe abortions will take place. An unsafe abortion is defined as “a procedure for terminating an unintended pregnancy carried out either by persons lacking the necessary skills or in an environment that does not conform to minimal medical standards, or both (outside source). Most illegal abortions occur in developing countries. The United States is very advance in every aspect, especially healthcare therefore there should be no reason for unsafe abortion fatality rates to be high. It is much better to have this procedure safely done than to risk the chance of losing one’s life or health complications. A woman is already faced with several different issues when it comes to a pregnancy. If an issue occurs and she would like to have an abortion the safe and legal option should always be a choice for her.

When it comes to the subject of abortion, many pro-life supporters believe that a person is killing the child by having an abortion. One pro-life supporter, John T. Noonan believes that human life begins at the moment of conception ( 133). Noonan believes that if a woman were to have an abortion at any stage of her pregnancy that she would be taking a life away. He also believes that humanization begins when a being receives a genetic code from its parents (100). This is because genetic information determines what characteristics one will have as well (100). Eugene Mills challenges Noonan’s argument by stating that human life begins either before or after conception not at the exact moment of conception ( 133). Mills goes on to argue that, “fertilization of an egg is conception. Hence if I was once an unfertilized egg, then I existed before conception. So, if I was once a fertilized egg—a zygote—then I did not originate at conception.” (136). Mills is ultimately arguing that if a woman were to have an abortion she would just be killing a fertilized egg or a zygote and until a person is born they are not considered a human being. Noonan also argues that viability is the start of human life. Viability is defined as the ability of the fetus to survive or live successfully without the help of the mother ( 95). But there is a flaw in Noonan’s viability argument because viability does not end. Children often depend on their parents their entire lives and do not reach their full potential without the help of them. A fetus maybe able to carryout some functions but a parent will always be needed. All of this being stated, the pro-life argument a life being taken away is invalid.