Introduction

Abortion is the termination of pregnancy by removing a fetus or embryo before it begins surviving outside the uterus. When a pregnancy is terminated deliberately, it is termed as an induced abortion.  The issue of induced abortion has always been a highly contentious topic sparking lengthy debates between supporters and opposers of the practice.People who oppose abortion on non-religious or religious grounds refer to themselves as “pro-life.” This hence makes the individuals who uphold the practice to appear as “anti-life.” Individuals who do not side with the practice argue that any person who would propose and support abortions is “against life.” However, several arguments oppose the “pro-life” standing stating that the decision as to whether to conduct an abortion, should be done by the pregnant woman herself(pro-choice) and no one else. It is these differing views between supporters of pro-choice and pro-life that leads to lengthy rhetoric abortion debates. The following report covers different perspectives and moral arguments in support and against induced abortion.  The moral arguments are presented based on differing individuals’ opinions who present them on conservative, liberal, moderate and feminist views. Also, the text includes the major agents involved in the practice and how each is concerned with regard to the moral issues of abortion.  The report concludes by offering the best possible resolution on the subject based on moral grounds.

The significant agents involved in the abortion practice

Three key persons can be stated to be the primary agents concerned in the abortion practice. They are the patients(pregnant women), health careproviders,nurses and doctors who choose to or not to conduct the abortion plus the fetus or embryo held in the uterus which is the victim in this case. The society too is a party to the moral duties regarding abortion. Their views, opinions and their moral stand influence the primary agents (patients and healthcare providers)decisions on conducting the abortion, plus the developmental stage of the fetus or embryo best to perform the abortion where deemed permissible.

The major facts of the case

Debates about moral standings on abortion are complicated. What can be considered as a relevant criterion for moral status remains an open question.Moreover, whether moral standing is a measurable notion, meaning something can have more moral standing than another, and whether moral standing can be built over time are also open questions. Certain philosophers associate moral standing with personhood and perceive anyone with a moral stand as a person, and persons are the beings to whom we have moral obligations and who have a strong opinion on the right to life.

Morality and law are not similar. Certain things that are legal may be immoral while other things that are illegal can be morally justified.Since 1988, there have been no laws against conducting abortions in Canada,making the practice perfectly legal in the country. In addition to this, laws are inexistent that protect the performance of an abortion.  This hence leaves the moral obligations and decisions surrounding the practice to the agents involved and the society at large.

The Major moral Issues raised

Different philosophers have different views on the ethical obligations surrounding cases of abortion. They vary from liberal to conservative perspectives. Feminists also have a different opinion on the moral compulsions to be considered concerning abortions.

A conservative approach to abortion is one which does not allow the practice altogether. Majority of religious thinkers support this approach, but so do a number of secular philosophers.  Among the arguments arising from this conservative perspective, is that the describing characteristic of a human being is possessing human DNA which makes it enough for moral status (Unit 7: Abortion). This perspective shows that human life in all its form is fundamentally valuable. The sperm and eggs(gametes) poses human DNA just like conceived fetuses and fully grown adults, all of these are deemed worthy of moral respect on the basis of the conservative views. The implication is that not only is abortion immoral but so is the practice of contraception and male masturbation. A less stringent conservative perspective holds that the gametes are not obliged to moral consideration as they possess only half of the needed genetic content to make a human being. Only fertilized ova(zygotes) deserve moral protection as they fully complement human genetic makeup. This hence does not make the practice of contraception wrong but holds that abortion is morally forbidden. The conservative argument however has a weak side to it since it only considers the possession of human DNA as the criteria for moral standing. This rules out animals as creatures’ worth of moral respect.

A differing conservative theme argues that fetuses have a valuable future just like adult human beings and are entitled to not beingkilled the same as we are.The argument which is presented by Don Marquis in his text “Why Abortion is Immoral” tries to show what makes killing immoral in the first place. In so doing, one can be able to come up with a philosophically sound abortion stand (Marquis). He argues that the reasons that make killing primarily unjustifiable are its effect on the victim. Ending one’s life deprives them all the enjoyments, activities, projects and experiences that would otherwise have been part of their future. In this regard, killing fetuses is similarly immoral as killing little children or adults as it constitutes denying them their future.

The liberal approach to abortion cases contradicts the conservative position as its moral spectrum is at the opposite end of the conservatives’ arguments.While conservatives would prohibit the practice, liberals would allow it (Warren). Notably, like the conservative perspectives, liberals contend that abortion and infanticide are morally equivalent. However, they perceive that not all instances of abortion are immoral. The liberal argument states that a being ought to have the capacity to desire its own continued existence if we are to allow it to have a substantial right to life. Liberals view killing to be wrong since it denies a human being the conscious will to keep on living, they contend that a human being can only acquire the capability of desiring to continue existing if it has reached a certain age where it has a stable sense of self. Therefore, on moral grounds, both fetuses and infants do not have similar rights to life as normal adults. This then makes the conservative argument less relevant since the considerations that make terminating an innocent human being in their view does not hold weight based on the liberals characteristics of a human being. Liberals find certain instances of infanticide and abortions to be morally acceptable.

The feminist views and approach to abortion cases shift the moral obligations from the fetus to the pregnant women. Whereas the conservative and the liberal arguments primarily focus on the unborn child, feminists’ arguments are centered on the woman holding the pregnancy. Susan Sherwin who is among the individuals who take the feminist perspective into account notes that the pregnant woman should be the central moral concern on matters of abortion (Susan Sherwin).  When analyzed from this angle, new dimensions can be included in the moral debates such as the different reasons why a woman might opt to terminate her pregnancy. Sherwin considers these reasons to be important and differ with the majority of mainstream debates of abortion.She places the debate about abortion in the context of the real lives of those involved and from a feminist perspective, the key moral feature of pregnancy is that it occurs in the bodies of women with profound effects on their lives. Therefore, leaving out the women bearing the pregnancy in the moral debates is a mistreatment of the abortion issue altogether. Sherwin observes that when women are involved in the mainstream debates about abortion, they are perceived as hostile or irresponsible towards their unborn children. The debates characterize pregnancy as a protracted fetal-maternal conflict whereby an innocent fetus is struggling to develop and come out unscathed after nine months in a hostile uterine surrounding. This, however, is not the correct depiction of pregnancy or how women perceive their fetuses. Although there exists the potential for a collision of interests, the perception of the pregnant woman as an adversary to the fetus misrepresents reality. In fact, most women strive to do what they can to provide their offspring with the best life possible.  Therefore, feminists demand the availability of reproductive technologies including those that can conduct safe abortions and should be readily accessible (Susan Sherwin). The feminists’ argument does not consider the fetuses to have no value, instead it has whatever value their mother attaches to them which in most cases is a great value. They consider the women to have full moral obligations in abortion cases, similar to the fetuses as perceived by the conservatives.

Health Care providers and how they respond to the abortion debate

All along, only the patients (pregnant women) and the fetuses are the agents considered in the different opinions on the abortion issue(conservative,liberal and feminist perceptions).  The doctors and nurses who are also main agents are left out, yet they are the key operators in the abortion procedure when deemed permissible. As much as health care providers’ personal feelings and opinions should not influence their duties in their profession, when it comes to cases of abortion, they might respond differently. Health care providers, just like any other human being, have different views on the practice. It becomes problematic for health care practitioners to provide services that are against their moral beliefs (Meyers).  However, with the current state of the abortion laws in Canada, women need to be able to access abortion services, and doctors cannot force specific patients to undertake abortions where it seems fit. Some doctors may refuse to provide abortions to patients when facing a moral dilemma as to whether they should uphold their personal values or take care of the patient.

Conclusion

The moral arguments on the abortion case are quite complex. A thin line differentiates what is wrong from what is right. The best resolution would be to take a moderate standing on the matter. Doing so makes abortions morally permissible only under compelling circumstances.The moderate perception permits early term abortions and prohibits late-term abortions except for instances that seem quite disastrous. The moderate approach considers the ability of the fetus to survive outsidethe uterus and its ability to feel as the primary factors in its criterion. The moral standing of this approach is that abortions are permissible only if the pregnancy poses a life-threatening risk to the patient. In this case, it should be done when the fetus is still young; if it has developed substantially, its survival should be prioritized by any means possible including developing it outside the uterus.

Works Cited

Marquis, Don. “Why Abortion Is Immoral.” Readings in Health Care Ethics (n.d.): 213-­224. Book.

Meyers, Christopher, and Robert D. Woods. “”An obligation to provide abortion services: what happens when physicians refuse ?.” Journal of Medical Ethics 22.2 ( 1996): 115-120. Document.

Susan Sherwin. “Abortion Through a Feminist Ethics Lens,.” (n.d.): 238-­248. Book.

“Unit 7: Abortion.” (2019): 3-20. Electronic source. <https://gsa.lms.athabascau.ca/mod/book/tool/print/index.php?id=2995>.

Warren, Mary Anne. “On the moral and legal status of abortion.” The Monist (1973): 43-61. document.

Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?