Lecture 05: A Brief Summary

The abortion debate arises from the conflict between two basic rights: the fetus’ right to life and the mother’s right over her own body. The pro-life position opposes taking the life of an unborn child, whereas the pro-choice position supports women’s freedom of choice over reproductive decisions.

The legal issues related to abortion have largely been settled in the United States with the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in 1973 that a pregnant woman has the right to seek an abortion during the first 6 months of her pregnancy.

However, what is legal is not necessarily moral However, what is legal is not necessarily moral. Even if a woman has a legal right to abortion, it does not follow that it is morally permissible for her to do so. That is why there is still a fierce debate about the moral permissibility of abortion.

A key question in the abortion debate is the moral status of the fetus A key question in the abortion debate is the moral status of the fetus. At what stage of its development does the fetus begin to have meaningful moral status? Conception? Onset of sentience? Viability? Or birth?

Since the very moment of conception, the zygote (i. e Since the very moment of conception, the zygote (i.e. fertilized egg) contains within it the genetic code (i.e. human DNA or the blueprint of the human organism). But is this a sufficient condition for moral status? Note that human DNA can also be found in our hair, fingernails and the skin we shed.

Sentient beings have sensations of pain and so are capable of suffering and, as such, they have an interest in not being caused to suffer. Since the late-term fetus is sentient and therefore morally considerable, it is argued that late-term abortion is impermissible because it harms the interests of a sentient being.

Sentience, however, does not seem to be a sufficient condition for personhood status (i.e. full moral status of a person). Frogs, lizards and rats are sentient beings, but few would say that these animals should be treated as persons.

Some may say that a fetus should be seen as a person when it becomes viable. But a viable fetus is unlikely to survive without intensive care and the aid of medical equipment such as an incubator. Thus, viability does not seem to be a sufficient condition for personhood status.

Some hold that birth is the decisive moment when the child attains full or meaningful moral status. But this seems arbitrary because there is no reason to think that the child’s moral status one second before birth is miraculously transformed one second after birth.

4 arguments in the abortion debate: Warren’s personhood argument the argument from potentiality Marquis’ future-like-ours argument Thomson’s bodily autonomy argument

Warren argues that although the fetus is biologically or genetically human, it does not qualify as a person because it does not possess the morally relevant characteristics of a person. The fetus, in Warren’s view, has no meaningful moral status before birth, and therefore abortion is morally permissible.

Warren suggests a series of traits or characteristics that are central to the concept of ‘personhood’; namely, [1] consciousness, [2] reasoning, [3] self-motivated activity, [4] the capacity to communicate, and [5] the presence of self-concept.

The argument from potentiality asserts that the fetus has the potential to develop into an actual person. As such, the fetus should be valued and respected for the potential and be accorded the same moral status and moral rights that we accord to actual persons.

According to Marquis, what makes killing wrong is the loss to the victim of the value of the victim’s future. Abortion is wrong for the exact same reason, i.e. it destroys the valuable future experiences of a potential person.

Thomson suggests that the focus of the abortion debate should be the pregnant woman’s bodily autonomy rather than the moral status of the fetus. A woman, in her view, has the right to decide what happens to her body and is under no obligation to support a child she does not want.

In Thomson’s view, even if it is assumed that the fetus is a person with full moral status and moral rights, it does not follow that the pregnant woman is morally required to allow the fetus to use her body. Why? Because no one has the right to use the body of another person without the person’s permission.

While you may or may not agree with the arguments mentioned above, it is necessary to [1] understand the reasoning behind them, [2] consider whether they stand up to the challenge of counterarguments, and [3] construct reasoned arguments to support your own position in the abortion debate.