Post on 14-Apr-2018
7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
1/40
Completed for CSE, EEE, To page 21
Abortion is one of the most persistently controversial issues in American culture and politics
today. Since the 1973 national legalization of abortion, competing groups have fought to
either restrict or increase access to the procedure, leading to heated debates among political
activists, religious organizations, state legislatures, and judges.
This conflict is perhaps reflective of the nations ambivalence over abortion. While it is often
depicted as a two-sided debate, the abortion controversy is actually quite multifaceted,
involving complex speculation on biology, ethics, and constitutional rights. Those who
identify themselves as prolife, for example, generally contend that abortion is wrong because
it kills human life, which they believe begins at conception. However, some pro-lifers grant
that abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest, or when the pregnancy threatens
the life or health of the mother. Those who identify themselves as pro-choice often maintain
that abortion must remain legal because a woman should have the right to control her body
and her destiny. But some pro-choicers also believe that there should be certain restrictions
on teen access to abortion and on abortions occurring after the first trimester of pregnancy.This mixture of opinions is probably why Gallup polls consistently show that 50 to 60
percent of Americans favor abortion only under certain circumstances.
The continuing debate over a relatively new form of second-trimester abortion called intact
dilation and extraction (D&X) reveals the complexity of American opinion on the subject.
Referred to as partial-birth abortion by its opponents, D&X is usually performed on women
who are between twenty and twenty-four weeks pregnant, ostensibly when the fetus has
severe defects or when the pregnancy endangers the mothers health. During the procedure,
the doctor delivers all but the head of the fetus from the uterus, then uses scissors to cut a
hole in the base of the fetuss skull so that its contents can be removed. This allows the
fetuss head to collapse so that it can more easily pass through the cervical opening.
Opponents of D&X maintain that it is a grisly and immoral procedure akin to infanticide. At
twenty-four weeks, they contend, more than 50 percent of fetuses are potentially viable (able
to survive outside of the womb). Moreover, as Illinois physicians M. LeRoy Sprang and
Mark G. Neerhoff claim, the procedure is hardly ever performed as a result of a medical
emergency: The vast majority [are] done not in response to extreme medical conditions but
on healthy mothers and healthy fetuses. They point out that 56 percent of partial-birth
abortions are done as a result of fetal flaws . . . some as minor as a cleft lip, while 9 percent
involve maternal healthproblems, of which the most common [is] depression.
Abortion-rights supporters assert that the vast majority of abortions are performed in the first
trimester, with only 1.4 percent occurring after twenty-one weeks of pregnancy:
approximately two thousand per year. Some contend that the furor over a relatively rare
procedure, which became a focal point for anti-abortion activism in the 1990s, was at heart an
attempt to sway public opinion against the more common types of abortion. However, most
of the physicians who perform D&X abortions grant that the majority of such procedures are
elective and not medically necessary.
These revelations about the D&X procedure disquieted Americans on all sides of the debate.
New York Times polls taken in 1997 concluded that between 54 and 71 percent of Americans
opposed late-term abortions. However, another 1997 poll commissioned by the RepublicanCoalition for Choice found that 82 percent of the public believed that the D&X option is a
7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
2/40
medical decision that should be made by a woman, her doctor, her family, and her clergy.
These seem- ingly contradictory poll results reflect public distaste over the procedure as well
as a reluctance to cede individual rights, claims Coalition for Choice president Susan R.
Cullman: People say, Its an awful procedure. I cant stand it. Get rid of it. But when you
say, If youre in this predicament, do you want doctors to give you options? the answer is,
Of course.
The D&X procedure did not exist in 1973, when the Supreme CourtsRoe v. Wade decision
held that a womans right to privacyincluding the right to choose to end a pregnancy in the
first two trimesterswas protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the Courts
1992 decision in PlannedParenthood v. Casey did allow states to set certain kinds of limits
on access to abortions. UnderCasey, as long as no undue burden is placed on women
seeking abortions, states can regulate access to the procedure. As a result, many state
legislatures enforced restrictions on abortion, including laws that significantly limited or
banned the D&X procedure. In addition, between 1995 and 2000, Congress passed several
bills attempting to impose a nationwide ban on D&X abortionsalthough each of these bills
was vetoed by President Bill Clinton.
In June 2000, in a 5-to-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Nebraska ban on
partial-birth abortions. Justice Stephen Breyer argued that the states law was unconstitutional
because it did not include any exceptions for protecting the health of the mother and because
the overly vague language of the law could have been used to ban the more common types of
second-trimester abortions. The ruling leaves open, however, the possibility that a more
clearly defined D&X ban could some day gain the approval of the Court.
The complex ethical and legal debate over abortion shows no sign of abating as activists,
legislators, and judges continue to ponder if and when the procedure should be regulated.
Abortion: Opposing Viewpoints explores this and several other contentious issues in the
following chapters: Is Abortion Immoral? Should Abortion Rights Be Restricted? Can
Abortion Be Justified? Is Abortion Safe? The authors in this anthology present compelling
arguments concerning the morality, accessibility, purpose, and effect of abortion.
[Constitutionally protected] abortion . . . has never been understood . . . to include taking
the life of a partly born child. U.S. Catholic Conference
A criminal statute banning any medically safe method of abortion unduly infringes upon
womens rights. Abortion Access Project
Abortion is one of the most persistently controversial issues in American culture and politics
today. Since the 1973 national legalization of abortion, competing groups have fought to
either restrict or increase access to the procedure, leading to heated debates among political
activists, religious organizations, state legislatures, and judges.
This conflict is perhaps reflective of the nations ambivalence over abortion. While it is often
depicted as a two-sided debate, the abortion controversy is actually quite multifaceted,
involving complex speculation on biology, ethics, and constitutional rights. Those who
identify themselves as prolife, for example, generally contend that abortion is wrong because
it kills human life, which they believe begins at conception. However, some pro-lifers grant
that abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest, or when the pregnancy threatensthe life or health of the mother. Those who identify themselves as pro-choice often maintain
7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
3/40
that abortion must remain legal because a woman should have the right to control her body
and her destiny. But some pro-choicers also believe that there should be certain restrictions
on teen access to abortion and on abortions occurring after the first trimester of pregnancy.
This mixture of opinions is probably why Gallup polls consistently show that 50 to 60
percent of Americans favor abortion only under certain circumstances.
The continuing debate over a relatively new form of second-trimester abortion called intact
dilation and extraction (D&X) reveals the complexity of American opinion on the subject.
Referred to as partial-birth abortion by its opponents, D&X is usually performed on women
who are between twenty and twenty-four weeks pregnant, ostensibly when the fetus has
severe defects or when the pregnancy endangers the mothers health. During the procedure,
the doctor delivers all but the head of the fetus from the uterus, then uses scissors to cut a
hole in the base of the fetuss skull so that its contents can be removed. This allows the
fetuss head to collapse so that it can more easily pass through the cervical opening.
Opponents of D&X maintain that it is a grisly and immoral procedure akin to infanticide. At
twenty-four weeks, they contend, more than 50 percent of fetuses are potentially viable (ableto survive outside of the womb). Moreover, as Illinois physicians M. LeRoy Sprang and
Mark G. Neerhoff claim, the procedure is hardly ever performed as a result of a medical
emergency: The vast majority [are] done not in response to extreme medical conditions but
on healthy mothers and healthy fetuses. They point out that 56 percent of partial-birth
abortions are done as a result of fetal flaws . . . some as minor as a cleft lip, while 9 percent
involve maternal health problems, of which the most common [is] depression.
Abortion-rights supporters assert that the vast majority of abortions are performed in the first
trimester, with only 1.4 percent occurring after twenty-one weeks of pregnancy:
approximately two thousand per year. Some contend that the furor over a relatively rare
procedure, which became a focal point for anti-abortion activism in the 1990s, was at heart an
attempt to sway public opinion against the more common types of abortion. However, most
of the physicians who perform D&X abortions grant that the majority of such procedures are
elective and not medically necessary.
These revelations about the D&X procedure disquieted Americans on all sides of the debate.
New York Times polls taken in 1997 concluded that between 54 and 71 percent of Americans
opposed late-term abortions. However, another 1997 poll commissioned by the Republican
Coalition for Choice found that 82 percent of the public believed that the D&X option is a
medical decision that should be made by a woman, her doctor, her family, and her clergy.
These seem- ingly contradictory poll results reflect public distaste over the procedure as wellas a reluctance to cede individual rights, claims Coalition for Choice president Susan R.
Cullman: People say, Its an awful procedure. I cant stand it. Get rid of it. But when you
say, If youre in this predicament, do you want doctors to give you options? the answer is,
Of course.
The D&X procedure did not exist in 1973, when the Supreme CourtsRoe v. Wade decision
held that a womans right to privacyincluding the right to choose to end a pregnancy in the
first two trimesterswas protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the Courts
1992 decision in PlannedParenthood v. Casey did allow states to set certain kinds of limits
on access to abortions. UnderCasey, as long as no undue burden is placed on women
seeking abortions, states can regulate access to the procedure. As a result, many statelegislatures enforced restrictions on abortion, including laws that significantly limited or
7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
4/40
banned the D&X procedure. In addition, between 1995 and 2000, Congress passed several
bills attempting to impose a nationwide ban on D&X abortionsalthough each of these bills
was vetoed by President Bill Clinton.
In June 2000, in a 5-to-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Nebraska ban on
partial-birth abortions. Justice Stephen Breyer argued that the states law was unconstitutionalbecause it did not include any exceptions for protecting the health of the mother and because
the overly vague language of the law could have been used to ban the more common types of
second-trimester abortions. The ruling leaves open, however, the possibility that a more
clearly defined D&X ban could some day gain the approval of the Court.
The complex ethical and legal debate over abortion shows no sign of abating as activists,
legislators, and judges continue to ponder if and when the procedure should be regulated.
Abortion: Opposing Viewpoints explores this and several other contentious issues in the
following chapters: Is Abortion Immoral? Should Abortion Rights Be Restricted? Can
Abortion Be Justified? Is Abortion Safe? The authors in this anthology present compelling
arguments concerning the morality, accessibility, purpose, and effect of abortion.
Pro-life arguments against abortion
This article'slead section may not adequately summarize key points of its
contents. Please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of
all important aspects of the article. (May 2011)
The abortion debate refers to the ongoing controversy surrounding the moral and legal
status ofabortion. The two main groups involved in the abortion debate are the self-described
"pro-choice" movement (emphasizing the right of women to choose whether they wish tobring a fetus to term) and the self-described "pro-life" movement (emphasizing the right of
the unborn child to be born). Both of these are considered loaded terms in general media
where terms such as "abortion rights" or "anti-abortion" are preferred.[1]Each movement has,
with varying results, sought to influence public opinion and to attain legal support for its
position, with some anti-abortion advocates even going as far as using violence.
Abortion law varies between jurisdictions. For example, in Canada abortion is available to
women without any legal restrictions,[2]while in Ireland abortions are illegal except when a
woman's life is at imminent risk[3]and Chilebans abortion with no exception for the life of
the pregnant woman.
Contents
[hide]
1 Overview 2 Terminology 3 Political debate
o 3.1 Privacyo 3.2 U.S. judicial involvemento 3.3 Canadian judicial involvemento 3.4 Effects of legalization/illegalization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_sectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_sectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Summary_stylehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#Provide_an_accessible_overviewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Support_for_the_legalization_of_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_legalization_of_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_wordhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canadahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_Republic_of_Irelandhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Overviewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Terminologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Political_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Privacyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#U.S._judicial_involvementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Canadian_judicial_involvementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Effects_of_legalization.2Fillegalizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Effects_of_legalization.2Fillegalizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Canadian_judicial_involvementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#U.S._judicial_involvementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Privacyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Political_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Terminologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Overviewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_Republic_of_Irelandhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canadahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_wordhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_legalization_of_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Support_for_the_legalization_of_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#Provide_an_accessible_overviewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Summary_stylehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
5/40
4 Ethical debateo 4.1 Question of personhoodo 4.2 Debates within the abortion debate
4.2.1 Fetal pain debate 4.2.2 Fetal personhood debate
o 4.3 Arguments in favor of the right to abortion 4.3.1 Bodily rights 4.3.2 Sexual emancipation and equality
o 4.4 Arguments against the right to abortion 4.4.1 Discrimination 4.4.2 Deprivation 4.4.3 Argument from uncertainty 4.4.4 Religious beliefs
o 4.5 Other factors 4.5.1 Mexico City Policy 4.5.2 Public opinion 4.5.3 Effect upon crime rate 4.5.4 Breast cancer hypothesis
5 Exceptions in abortion law 6 See also 7 Notes 8 References 9 External links
Overview
In ancient times, abortion, along with infanticide, had been considered a matter of family
planning, gender selection, population control, and the property rights of the patriarch.[4]
Rarely were the rights of the prospective mother, much less the prospective child, taken into
consideration.[5]Although generally legal, the morality of abortion, birth control and child
abandonment (as a form of infanticide) was sometimes discussed. Then, as now, these
discussions often concerned the nature of man, the existence of a soul, when life begins, and
the beginning of human personhood.
While the practice of infanticide (as a form of family planning) has largely died out, child
abandonment, birth control, and abortion are still practiced; and their morality and legality
continues to be debated. While modern debates about abortion retain some of the language of
these older debates, the terminology has often acquired new meanings. Reason is now seen as
a human ability rather than as a spirit personified.[6]
Any discussion of the putative personhood of the fetus will be complicated by the current
legal status of children. They are not full persons[7]at law until they have reached the age of
majority and are deemed able to enter into contracts and sue or be sued at law. However, for
the past two centuries, they have been treated as persons for the limited purposes ofOffence
against the person law. Furthermore, as one New Jersey Superior Courtjudge noted,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Ethical_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Question_of_personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Debates_within_the_abortion_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Fetal_pain_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Fetal_personhood_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Arguments_in_favor_of_the_right_to_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Bodily_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Sexual_emancipation_and_equalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Arguments_against_the_right_to_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Discriminationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Deprivationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Argument_from_uncertaintyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Religious_beliefshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Other_factorshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Mexico_City_Policyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Public_opinionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Effect_upon_crime_ratehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Breast_cancer_hypothesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Exceptions_in_abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#See_alsohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Noteshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Referenceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#External_linkshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_controlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offence_against_the_personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offence_against_the_personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey_Superior_Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey_Superior_Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offence_against_the_personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offence_against_the_personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_controlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#External_linkshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Referenceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Noteshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#See_alsohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Exceptions_in_abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Breast_cancer_hypothesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Effect_upon_crime_ratehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Public_opinionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Mexico_City_Policyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Other_factorshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Religious_beliefshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Argument_from_uncertaintyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Deprivationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Discriminationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Arguments_against_the_right_to_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Sexual_emancipation_and_equalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Bodily_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Arguments_in_favor_of_the_right_to_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Fetal_personhood_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Fetal_pain_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Debates_within_the_abortion_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Question_of_personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#Ethical_debate7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
6/40
If a fetus is a person, it is a person in very special circumstancesit exists entirely within the
body of another much larger person and usually cannot be the object of direct action by
another person.[8]
This judgement discusses the logistic difficulties of treating the fetus as an "object of direct
action".
Opinions in the current debate range from complete prohibition, even if done to save the
woman's life,[9]to complete legalization with public funding, as in Canada.[10]
Terminology
Many of the terms used in the debate are seen as political framing: terms used to validate
one's own stance while invalidating the opposition's. For example, the labels "pro-choice"
and "pro-life" imply endorsement of widely held values such as liberty and freedom, while
suggesting that the opposition must be "anti-choice" or "anti-life" (alternatively "pro-coercion" or "pro-death").[11]Terms used by some in the debate to describe their opponents
include "pro-abortion" or "pro-abort". However, these terms do not always reflect a political
view or fall along a binary; in one Public Religion Research Institutepoll, seven in ten
Americans described themselves as "pro-choice" while almost two-thirds described
themselves as "pro-life."[12]
Appeals are often made in the abortion debate to the rights of the fetus, pregnant woman, or
other parties. Such appeals can generate confusion if the type of rights is not specified
(whethercivil, natural, or otherwise) or if it is simply assumedthat the right appealed to takes
precedence over all other competing rights (an example ofbegging the question).
The appropriate terms with which to designate the human organism prior to birth are also
debated. The medical terms "embryo" and "fetus" are seen by some pro-life advocates as
dehumanizing.[13][14]
Political debate
Politics refers to the processes, defined and limited through legal documents, by which
decisions (laws) are made in governments. In politics, rights are the protections and
privileges legally granted to citizens by the government. In a democracy, certain rights are
considered to be inalienable, and thus not subject to grant or withdrawal by government.Regarding abortion law, the political debate usually surrounds a right to privacy, and when or
how a government may regulate abortion. There is abundant debate regarding the extent of
abortion regulation. Some pro-choice advocates argue that it should be illegal for
governments to regulate abortion any more than other medical practices.[15]On both sides of
the debate, some argue[who?] that governments should be permitted to prohibit elective
abortions after the 20th week,[16] viability,[17]or the second trimester.[18]Some want to
prohibit all abortions, starting from conception.[19]
Privacy
Even though the right to privacy is not explicitly stated in many constitutions of sovereignnations, many people see it as foundational to a functioning democracy. In general the right
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canadahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-AmmerManson2009-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-AmmerManson2009-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-AmmerManson2009-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_(social_sciences)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_(political)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Religion_Research_Institutehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-12http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-12http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-12http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_questionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-13http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-13http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-13http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienablehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-15http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-15http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-15http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_wordshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_wordshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_wordshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-16http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-16http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_of_fetal_viabilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-17http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/trimesterhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-18http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/trimesterhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_of_fetal_viabilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-16http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_wordshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-15http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienablehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-13http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-13http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_questionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-12http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Religion_Research_Institutehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_(political)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_(social_sciences)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-AmmerManson2009-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canadahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-87/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
7/40
to privacy can be found to rest on the provisions ofhabeas corpus, which first found official
expression under Henry II in 11th century England, but has precedent in Anglo-Saxon law.
This provision guarantees the right to freedom from arbitrary government interference, as
well as due process of law. This conception of the right to privacy is operant in all countries
which have adopted English common law through Acts of Reception. The Law of the United
States rests on English common law by this means.
Timehas stated that the issue of bodily privacy is "the core" of the abortion debate.[20]Time
defined privacy, in relation to abortion, as the ability of a woman to "decide what happens to
her own body".[20]In political terms, privacy can be understood as a condition in which one is
not observed or disturbed by government.[21]
Traditionally, American courts have located the right to privacy in the Fourth Amendment,
Ninth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, as well as the penumbra of the Bill of Rights.
The landmark decision,Roe v Waderelied on the 14th Amendment which guarantees that
federal rights shall be applied equally to all persons born in the United States. The 14th
Amendment has given rise to the doctrine ofSubstantive due process, which is said toguarantee various privacy rights, including the right to bodily integrity. In Canada, the courts
have located privacy rights in the security of persons clause of the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms. Section 7 of that charter echoes language used in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, which also guarantees security of persons.
Eileen L. McDonagh explains privacy in US law:
Although not widely understood, there are in fact two components to the right to bodily
integrity and liberty: the right of a person to choose how to live her own life and the right of a
person to consent to the effects of a private party on her bodily integrity and liberty. In the
context of constitutional guarantees, a person's right to consent to "what is done" to her body
is an even stronger right than a person's right to choose "what to do" with her life...Since
there are two components to the right to bodily integrity and liberty--choice and consent--
once the state designates the fetus as an entity separate from the woman, her right to
terminate pregnancy stems not only from her right to make a choice about her liberty, but
more fundamentally, from her right to consent to how the fetus, as another entity, affects her
body and liberty.[22]
While governments are allowed to invade the privacy of their citizens in some cases, they are
expected to protect privacy in all cases lacking a compelling state interest. In the US, the
compelling state interest test has been developed in accordance with the standards of strictscrutiny. InRoe v Wade, the Court decided that the state has an "important and legitimate
interest in protecting the potentiality of human life" from the point of viability on, but that
prior to viability, the woman's fundamental rights are more compelling than that of the state.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_common_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_(magazine)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_(magazine)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Time-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Time-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Time-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Time-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Time-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Time-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_laws_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v_Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v_Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v_Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantive_due_processhttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Substantive+Due+Processhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedomshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedomshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutinyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roevwade.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutinyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedomshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedomshttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Substantive+Due+Processhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantive_due_processhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v_Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_laws_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Time-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Time-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_(magazine)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_common_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
8/40
Albert Wynn and Gloria Feldt at the U.S. Supreme Court to rally in support ofRoe v. Wade.
U.S. judicial involvement
Roe v. Wadestruck down state laws banning abortion in 1973. Over 20 cases have addressedabortion law in the United States, all of which upheldRoe v. Wade. SinceRoe, abortion has
been legal throughout the country, but states have placed varying regulations on it, from
requiring parental involvement in a minor's abortion to restricting late-term abortions.
Legal criticisms of theRoe decision address many points, among them are several suggesting
that it is an overreach of judicial powers,[23]or that it was not properly based on the
Constitution,[24]or that it is an example ofjudicial activism and that it should be overturned
so that abortion law can be decided by legislatures.[25]Justice Potter Stewart, who joined with
the majority, viewed theRoe opinion as "legislative" and asked that more consideration be
paid to state legislatures.[26]
Candidates competing for the Democratic nomination for the 2008 Presidential election cited
Gonzales v. Carhartas judicial activism.[27]In upholding the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act,
Carhartis the first judicial opinion upholding a legal barrier to a specific abortion procedure.
"Where, in the performance of its judicial duties, the Court decides a case in such a way as to
resolve the sort of intensely divisive controversy reflected in Roe and those rare, comparable
cases, its [505 U.S. 833, 867] decision has a dimension that the resolution of the normal case
does not carry. It is the dimension present whenever the Court's interpretation of the
Constitution calls the contending sides of a national controversy to end their national division
by accepting a common mandate rooted in the Constitution [...W]hatever the premises ofopposition may be, only the most convincing justification under accepted standards of
precedent could suffice to demonstrate that a later decision overruling the first was anything
but a surrender to political pressure and an unjustified repudiation of the principle on which
the Court staked its authority in the first instance." -Majority opinion ofPlanned Parenthood
v. Casey.[28][29]
Quite to the contrary, by foreclosing all democratic outlet for the deep passions this issue
arouses, by banishing the issue from the political forum that gives all participants, even the
losers, the satisfaction of a fair hearing and an honest fight, by continuing the imposition of a
rigid national rule instead of allowing for regional differences, the Court merely prolongs and
intensifies the anguish [over abortion].Justice Antonin Scalia, "concurring in the judgmentin part and dissenting in part".[29]
"No to abortion" at a 2007 meeting with Pope Benedict XVI in So Paulo, Brazil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Wynnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Wynnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Feldthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_abortion_case_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minors_and_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-23http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-23http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-23http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_activismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potter_Stewarthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Carharthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Carharthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-Birth_Abortion_Ban_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority_opinionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Caseyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Caseyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonin_Scaliahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Find1-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Find1-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Find1-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVIhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Paulohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BentoXVI-37-10052007.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BentoXVI-37-10052007.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roevwade.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BentoXVI-37-10052007.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BentoXVI-37-10052007.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roevwade.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BentoXVI-37-10052007.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BentoXVI-37-10052007.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roevwade.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Paulohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVIhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Find1-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonin_Scaliahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Caseyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Caseyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority_opinionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-Birth_Abortion_Ban_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Carharthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potter_Stewarthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_activismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-23http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minors_and_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_abortion_case_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Feldthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Wynn7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
9/40
Canadian judicial involvement
Main article: Abortion in Canada
WithR v. Morgentaler, the Supreme Court of Canada removed abortion from the Criminal
Code. Relying on the security of person clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights andFreedoms, the court determined that, while the state has an interest in protecting the fetus "at
some point", this interest cannot override that of the pregnant woman because: "the right to
security of the person of a pregnant woman was infringed more than was required to achieve
the objective of protecting the fetus, and the means were not reasonable." The only laws
currently governing abortion in Canada are those which govern other medical procedures,
such as those regulating licencing of facilities, the training of medical personnel, and the like.
Because the courts did not specifically establish abortion as a right, Parliament has leave to
legislate on this aspect of the matter; and in 1989, the Progressive Conservative government
attempted to do just that. A bill was introduced that would allow abortion only if two doctors
certified that the woman's health was in danger. This bill passed the House of Commons but
was defeated by a tie vote in the Senate.
Several additional cases have considered further issues.
Although the courts have not ruled on the question of fetal personhood, the question has been
raised in two cases,Tremblay v. DaigleandR. v. Sullivan. Both cases relied on the born alive
rule, inherited from English common law, to determine that the fetus was not a person at law.
Two further cases are notable:Dobson (Litigation Guardian of) v. Dobson, and Winnipeg
Child & Family Services (Northwest Area) v. G . (D.F.), [I9971 3 S.C.R. 925 M, whichdismissed so-called fetal abuse charges.
Effects of legalization/illegalization
Pro-choice advocates argue that illegalization of abortion increases the incidence ofunsafe
abortions, as the availability of professional abortion services decreases, and leads to
increased maternal mortality. According to a global study collaboratively conducted by the
World Health Organization and the Guttmacher Institute, most unsafe abortions occurwhere
abortion is illegal.[30]
The effect on crime of legalized abortion is a subject of controversy, with proponents of thetheory generally arguing that "unwanted children" are more likely to become criminals and
that an inverse correlation is observed between the availability of abortion and subsequent
crime.
Economist George Akerlofhas argued that the legalization of abortion in the United States
has contributed to the decline ofshotgun weddings even when women choose childbirth over
abortion and thus to an increase rather than a decrease in the rate of children born to unwed
mothers.[31]The Economic Journal,[32]
Ethical debate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canadahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v._Morgentalerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v._Morgentalerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v._Morgentalerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedomshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedomshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tremblay_v._Daiglehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tremblay_v._Daiglehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tremblay_v._Daiglehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Sullivanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Sullivanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Sullivanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_alive_rulehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_alive_rulehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobson_(Litigation_Guardian_of)_v._Dobsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobson_(Litigation_Guardian_of)_v._Dobsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobson_(Litigation_Guardian_of)_v._Dobsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maternal_mortalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guttmacher_Institutehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Akerlofhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(law)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economic_Journalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economic_Journalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economic_Journalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(law)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Akerlofhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guttmacher_Institutehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maternal_mortalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobson_(Litigation_Guardian_of)_v._Dobsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_alive_rulehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_alive_rulehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Sullivanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tremblay_v._Daiglehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedomshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedomshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v._Morgentalerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canada7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
10/40
This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of
this nomination can be found on the talk page.(January 2009)
Main article: Philosophical aspects of the abortion debate
Ethics refers to "moral philosophy", or the study ofvalues and the analysis ofright andwrong. The ethical debate over abortion usually surrounds the issues of whether a fetus has
rights, in particular a right to life, and whether the pregnant woman's rights over her own
body justify abortion even ifthe fetus has a right to life. For many, there is a strong
association between religion and abortion ethics.
Ethical question regarding abortion usually include:
Are embryos, zygotes and fetuses "persons" worthy of legal protections? Should thepotentialto be a person give embryos, zygotes and fetuses a right to life? Does a fetus gain rights as it gets closer to birth? Does a woman have an absolute right to determine what happens in and to her body? Is abortion acceptable in cases of rape, incest, or contraception failure? Is abortion acceptable in cases where the fetus is deformed? Is abortion acceptable in cases where if the pregnancy were to continue, it would pose
a direct threat to the life of the mother?[33][34]
Question of personhood
Establishing the point in time when a zygote/embryo/fetus becomes a "person" is open to
debate since the definition ofpersonhood is not universally agreed upon.
Philosophers have traditionally declared that some characteristic of reason ought to be
included in the definition of person, and the term "person" is not defined in standard science
texts. Peter Singerargued that something can only be a person if it is self-aware and has
temporal awareness. Therefore, abortion is morally acceptable, because a fetus does not meet
this definition of personhood. Singer also concluded that infanticide would be permissible
until the 3rd month after birth, because, at that point, self-awareness has still not been
acquired.[35]
Additionally, the term "person" has many different definitions in law, specifically with
children being defined in many ways. For instance, children are not considered persons until
they reach the age of majority and are able to enter into legally binding contracts and sue orbe sued. For the purposes of Offenses against the person law, however, they are considered to
be persons. According to Bouvier's Law Dictionary[36]in 1839, women, children, and slaves
were considered persons, but with various limitations. Today, only children have limited
personhood under the law. If the fetus is a person in some sense, it is nonetheless living
inside the body of someone who is a full person at law.
Debates within the abortion debate
Many of the views in favor of and against the right to abortion are framed in the context of
other debates whose arguments and implications relate directly to the topic of abortion.
Fetal pain debate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_viewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_viewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abortion_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_aspects_of_the_abortion_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valueshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_and_wronghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_and_wronghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_lifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_and_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_lifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-routledge-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-routledge-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-routledge-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awarenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-35http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-35http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-35http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouvier%27s_Law_Dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouvier%27s_Law_Dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouvier%27s_Law_Dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouvier%27s_Law_Dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouvier%27s_Law_Dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-35http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awarenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-routledge-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-routledge-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_lifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_and_abortionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_lifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_and_wronghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_and_wronghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valueshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_aspects_of_the_abortion_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abortion_debatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
11/40
Main article: Neonatal perception
This section is outdated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly
available information. (December 2011)
Fetal pain, its existence, and its implications are part of a larger debate about abortion. Manyresearchers in the area of fetal development believe that a fetus is unlikely to feel pain until
after the sixth month of pregnancy.[37]Developmental neurobiologists suspect that the
establishment ofthalamocortical connections (at about 26 weeks) may be critical to fetal
perception of pain.[38]However, legislation has been proposed by anti-abortion advocates
requiring abortion providers to tell a woman that the fetus may feel pain during an abortion
procedure.[39]
A review by researchers from the University of California, San Francisco inJAMAconcluded
that data from dozens of medical reports and studies indicate that fetuses are unlikely to feel
pain until the third trimesterof pregnancy.
[40]
However a number of medical critics havesince disputed these conclusions.[37][41]Other researchers such as Anand and Fisk have
challenged the idea that pain cannot be felt before 26 weeks, positing instead that pain can be
felt at around 20 weeks.[42]Anand's suggestion is disputed in a March 2010 report on Fetal
Awarenesspublished by a working party of the Royal College of Obstetricians and
Gynaecologists, citing a lack of evidence or rationale. Page 20 of the report definitively states
that the fetus cannot feel pain prior to week 24. Because pain can involve sensory, emotional
and cognitive factors, leaving it "impossible to know" when painful experiences are
perceived, even if it is known when thalamocortical connections are established.[43]
Wendy Savage Press officer, Doctors for a Womans Choice on Abortion, considers the
question to be irrelevant. In a letter to theBritish Medical Journal, April 1997, she noted thatthe majority of surgical abortions in Britain are already performed under general anesthesia
which affects the fetus, and considers the discussion "to be unhelpful to women and to the
scientific debate." Others caution against unnecessary use of fetal anesthetic during abortion,
as it poses potential health risks to the pregnant woman.[40]David Mellor and colleagues have
noted that the fetal brain is already awash in naturally occurring chemicals that keep it
sedated and anesthetized until birth.[44]At least one anesthesia researcher has suggested the
fetal pain legislation may make abortions harder to obtain because abortion clinics lack the
equipment and expertise to supply fetal anesthesia. Currently, anesthesia is administered
directly to fetuses only while they are undergoing surgery.[45]
Fetal personhood debate
Main article: Beginning of human personhood
Although the two main sides of the abortion debate tend to agree that fetuses are biologically
and genetically human (that is, of the human species), they often differ in their view on
whether or not a fetus is, in any of various ways, aperson. Pro-life supporters argue that
abortion is morally wrong on the basis that a fetus is an innocent human person[46]or because
a fetus is a potential life that will, in most cases, develop into a fully functional human
being.[47]Others reject this position by drawing a distinction between human beingand
human person, arguing that while the fetus is innocentand biologically human, it is not a
person with a right to life.[48]In support of this distinction, some propose a list of criteria asmarkers ofpersonhood. For example, Mary Ann Warren suggests consciousness (at least the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonatal_perceptionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-MSNBC_pain-37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-MSNBC_pain-37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-MSNBC_pain-37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurobiologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_thalamushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Johnson-38http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Johnson-38http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Johnson-38http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-39http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-39http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-39http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_San_Franciscohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_the_American_Medical_Associationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_the_American_Medical_Associationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_the_American_Medical_Associationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_trimesterhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Lee_SJ.2C_Ralston_HJ.2C_Drey_EA.2C_Partridge_JC.2C_Rosen_MA_2005_947-954-40http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Lee_SJ.2C_Ralston_HJ.2C_Drey_EA.2C_Partridge_JC.2C_Rosen_MA_2005_947-954-40http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Lee_SJ.2C_Ralston_HJ.2C_Drey_EA.2C_Partridge_JC.2C_Rosen_MA_2005_947-954-40http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-MSNBC_pain-37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-MSNBC_pain-37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-MSNBC_pain-37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-NYT_pain-42http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-NYT_pain-42http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-NYT_pain-42http://www.rcog.org.uk/fetal-awareness-review-research-and-recommendations-practicehttp://www.rcog.org.uk/fetal-awareness-review-research-and-recommendations-practicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-43http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-43http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-43http://www.bmj.com/content/314/7088/1201.1.extracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Lee_SJ.2C_Ralston_HJ.2C_Drey_EA.2C_Partridge_JC.2C_Rosen_MA_2005_947-954-40http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Lee_SJ.2C_Ralston_HJ.2C_Drey_EA.2C_Partridge_JC.2C_Rosen_MA_2005_947-954-40http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Lee_SJ.2C_Ralston_HJ.2C_Drey_EA.2C_Partridge_JC.2C_Rosen_MA_2005_947-954-40http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-44http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-44http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-44http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-45http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-45http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-45http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-47http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-47http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-47http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-48http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-48http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-48http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Ann_Warrenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousnesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gnome_globe_current_event.svghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousnesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Ann_Warrenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-48http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-47http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-45http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-44http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Lee_SJ.2C_Ralston_HJ.2C_Drey_EA.2C_Partridge_JC.2C_Rosen_MA_2005_947-954-40http://www.bmj.com/content/314/7088/1201.1.extracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-43http://www.rcog.org.uk/fetal-awareness-review-research-and-recommendations-practicehttp://www.rcog.org.uk/fetal-awareness-review-research-and-recommendations-practicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-NYT_pain-42http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-MSNBC_pain-37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-MSNBC_pain-37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Lee_SJ.2C_Ralston_HJ.2C_Drey_EA.2C_Partridge_JC.2C_Rosen_MA_2005_947-954-40http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_trimesterhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_the_American_Medical_Associationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_San_Franciscohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-39http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Johnson-38http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_thalamushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurobiologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-MSNBC_pain-37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonatal_perception7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
12/40
capacity to feel pain), reasoning, self-motivation, the ability to communicate, and self-
awareness.[49]According to Warren, a being need not exhibit all of these criteria to qualify as
a person with a right to life, but if a being exhibits none of them (or perhaps only one), then it
is certainly not a person. Warren concludes that as the fetus satisfies only one criterion,
consciousness (and this only after it becomes susceptible to pain),[50]the fetus is not a person
and abortion is therefore morally permissible. Other philosophers apply similar criteria,concluding that a fetus lacks a right to life because it lacks brain waves or higher brain
function,[51]self-consciousness,[52]rationality,[53]and autonomy.[54]These lists diverge over
precisely which features confer a right to life,[55]but tend to propose various developed
psychological or physiological features not found in fetuses.
Critics of this typically argue that some of the proposed criteria for personhood would
disqualify two classes ofborn human beingsreversibly comatosepatients, and human
infantsfrom having a right to life, since they, like fetuses, are not self-conscious, do not
communicate, and so on.[56]Defenders of the proposed criteria may respond that the
reversibly comatose do satisfy the relevant criteria because they "retain all theirunconscious
mental states".[57]or at least some higher brain function (brain waves). Warren concedes thatinfants are not "persons" by her proposed criteria,[58]and on that basis she and others concede
that infanticide could be morally acceptable under some circumstances (for example if theinfant is severely disabled[59]or in order to save the lives of several other infants[60]). Critics
may see such concessions as an indication that the right to life cannot be adequately defined
by reference to developed psychological features.
An alternative approach is to base personhood or the right to life on a being's naturalor
inherentcapacities. On this approach, a being essentially has a right to life if it has a natural
capacity to develop the relevant psychological features; and, since human beings do have this
natural capacity, they essentially have a right to life beginning at conception (or whenever
they come into existence).[61]Critics of this position argue that mere genetic potential is not a
plausible basis for respect (or for the right to life), and that basing a right to life on natural
capacities would lead to the counterintuitive position that anencephalic infants, irreversibly
comatose patients, and brain-dead patients kept alive on a medical ventilator, are all persons
with a right to life.[62]Respondents to this criticism argue that the noted human cases in fact
would not be classified as persons as they do not have a natural capacity to develop any
psychological features.[63][64][65]Also, in a view that favors benefiting even unconceived but
potential future persons, it has been argued as justified to abort an unintended pregnancy in
favor for conceiving a new child later in better conditions.[66]
Members ofBound4LIFE in Washington, D.C. symbolically cover their mouths with red
tape.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasoninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Self-motivation&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-awarenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-awarenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-49http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-49http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-49http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_painhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-50http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-50http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-50http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_oscillationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-51http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-51http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-51http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-52http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-52http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-52http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-53http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-53http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-53http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-54http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-54http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-54http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-55http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-55http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-55http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-56http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-56http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-56http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-57http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-57http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-57http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-58http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-58http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-58http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-59http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-59http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-60http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-60http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-60http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conception_(biology)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-61http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-61http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-61http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anencephalyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_ventilatorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-62http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-62http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-62http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-63http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-63http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-65http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-65http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_pregnancyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Savulescu2002-66http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Savulescu2002-66http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Savulescu2002-66http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bound4LIFEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pro-Life_Demonstration_at_Supreme_Court.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pro-Life_Demonstration_at_Supreme_Court.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pro-Life_Demonstration_at_Supreme_Court.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pro-Life_Demonstration_at_Supreme_Court.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bound4LIFEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-Savulescu2002-66http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_pregnancyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-65http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-63http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-63http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-62http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_ventilatorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anencephalyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-61http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conception_(biology)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-60http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-59http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-58http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-57http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-56http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-55http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-54http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-53http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-52http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-51http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_oscillationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-50http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_painhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-49http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-awarenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-awarenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Self-motivation&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasoning7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
13/40
Philosophers such as Aquinas use the concept ofindividuation. They argue that abortion is
not permissible from the point at which individual human identity is realised. Anthony Kenny
argues that this can be derived from everyday beliefs and language and one can legitimately
say "if my mother had had an abortion six months into her pregnancy, she would have killed
me" then one can reasonably infer that at six months the "me" in question would have been
an existing person with a valid claim to life. Since division of the zygote into twins throughthe process ofmonozygotic twinning can occur until the fourteenth day of pregnancy, Kenny
argues that individual identity is obtained at this point and thus abortion is not permissible
after two weeks.[67]
Arguments in favor of the right to abortion
Bodily rights
An argument first presented by Judith Jarvis Thomson states that even ifthe fetus has a right
to life, abortion is morally permissible because a woman has a right to control her own body.
Thomson's variant of this argument draws an analogy between forcing a woman to continue
an unwanted pregnancy and forcing a person's body to be used as a dialysis machine for
another person suffering from kidney failure. It is argued that just as it would be permissible
to "unplug" and thereby cause the death of the person who is using one's kidneys, so it is
permissible to abort the fetus (who similarly, it is said, has no right to use one's body against
one's will).
Critics of this argument generally argue that there are morally relevant disanalogies between
abortion and the kidney failure scenario. For example, it is argued that the fetus is the
woman's child as opposed to a mere stranger;[68]that abortion kills the fetus rather than
merely letting it die;
[69]
and that in the case of pregnancy arising from voluntary intercourse,the woman has either tacitly consented to the fetus using her body,[70]or has a duty to allow it
to use her body since she herself is responsible for its need to use her body.[71]Some writers
defend the analogy against these objections, arguing that the disanalogies are morally
irrelevant or do not apply to abortion in the way critics have claimed.[72]
Alternative scenarios have been put forth as more accurate and realistic representations of the
moral issues present in abortion. John Noonanproposes the scenario of a family who was
found to be liable for frostbite finger loss suffered by a dinner guest whom they refused to
allow to stay overnight, although it was very cold outside and the guest showed signs of
being sick. It is argued that just as it would not be permissible to refuse temporary
accommodation for the guest to protect him from physical harm, it would not be permissibleto refuse temporary accommodation of a fetus.[73]
Other critics claim that there is a difference between artificial and extraordinary means of
preservation, such as medical treatment, kidney dialysis, and blood transfusions, and normal
and natural means of preservation, such as gestation, childbirth, and breastfeeding. They
argue that if a baby was born into an environment in which there was no replacement
available for her mother's breast milk, and the baby would either breastfeed or starve, the
mother would have to allow the baby to breastfeed. But the mother would never have to give
the baby a blood transfusion, no matter what the circumstances were. The difference between
breastfeeding in that scenario and blood transfusions is the difference between using your
body as a kidney dialysis machine, and gestation and childbirth.[74][75][76][77][78][79]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquinashttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Kennyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-67http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-67http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-67http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Jarvis_Thomsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidney_failurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-68http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-68http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-68http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-69http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-69http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-69http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-70http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-70http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-70http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-71http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-71http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-71http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-72http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-72http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-72http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Noonanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-73http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-73http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-73http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-74http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-74http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-76http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-78http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-78http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-78http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-78http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-76http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-76http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-74http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-74http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-73http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Noonanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-72http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-71http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-70http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-69http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-68http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidney_failurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Jarvis_Thomsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-67http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Kennyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquinas7/30/2019 Abortion - Pros and Cons
14/40
Sexual emancipation and equality
Margaret Sanger wrote: "No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously
whether she will or will not be a mother."[80]Denying the right to abortion can be construed
from this perspective as a form offemale oppression under a patriarchal system, perpetuating
inequality between the sexes. Among pro-choice advocates, sexual-equality discussion ofteninvolves the additional debate regarding to what degree the potential father should have a
choice in deciding whether or not to abort the developing child.[citation needed]
Arguments against the right to abortion
Discrimination
The bookAbortion and the Conscience of the Nation presents the argument that abortion
involves unjust discrimination against the unborn. According to this argument, those who
deny that fetuses have a right to life do not value allhuman life, but instead select arbitrary
characteristics (such as particular levels of physical or psychological development) as giving
some human beings more value or rights than others.[81]
In contrast, philosophers who define the right to life by reference to particular levels of
physical or psychological development typically maintain that such characteristics are
morally relevant,[82]and reject the assumption that all human life necessarily has value (or
that membership in the speciesHomo sapiensis in itself morally relevant).[83]
Deprivation
Further information: Philosophical aspects of the abortion debate
The argument of deprivation states that abortion is morally wrong because it deprives the
fetus of a valuable future.[84]On this account, killing an adulthuman being is wrong because
it deprives the victim of afuture like oursa future containing highly valuable or desirable
experiences, activities, projects, and enjoyments.[85]If a being has such a future, then
(according to the argument) killing that being would seriously harm it and hence would be
seriously wrong.[86]But since a fetus does have such a future, the "overwhelming majority" of
deliberate abortions are placed in the "same moral category" as killing an innocent adult
human being.[87]Not allabortions are unjustified according to this argument: abortion would
be justified if the same justification could be applied to killing an adult human.
Criticism of this line of reasoning follows several threads. Some reject the argument on
grounds relating to personal identity, holding that the fetus is not the same entity as the adult
into which it will develop, and thus that the fetus does not have a "future like ours" in the
required sense.[88]Others grant that the fetus has a future like ours, but argue that being
deprived of this future is not a significant harm or a significant wrong to the fetus, because
there are relatively fewpsychological connections (continuations of memory, belief, desire
and the like) between the fetus as it is now and the adult into which it will develop .[89]
Another criticism is that the argument creates inequalities in the wrongness of killing:[90]as
the futures of some people appear to be far more valuable or desirable than the futures of
other people, the argument appears to entail that some killings are far more wrongthan
others, or that some people have a far strongerright to life than othersa conclusion that istaken to be counterintuitive or unacceptable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-80http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-80http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-80http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppression_of_womenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discriminationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-81http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-81http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-81http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-82http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-82http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-82http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapienshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapienshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapienshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-83http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-83http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-83http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_aspects_of_the_abortion_debate#The_deprivation_argumenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-84http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-84http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-84http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-85http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-85http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-85http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-86http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-86http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-86http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-87http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-87http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-87http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_identity_(philosophy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-88http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-88http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-88http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_debate#cite_note-89http://en.wikipedia.or