An onlookers view of Pro Choice amongst women
Many clinics provide abortion services for women with unplanned or uncontrollable pregnancies. Some women find themselves with an unplanned pregnancy rather than an uncontrollable one. Unplanned in fact that a contraceptive failed, or may not have been easily accessible: uncontrolled in the sense of factors being greater than limited contraception. Abortion has been performed in many clinics as a treatment for unfit or unhealthy women, and for women who may have been molested or raped. Abortion shouldn’t be used as a form of contraception, nor should women’s lives be sacrificed to bear an infant before morally ready to commit. If a woman is raped, and the outcome incurs pregnancy, then abortion is an alternate form of controlling the unwanted pregnancy. Abortion should stand as only the woman’s choice, never as a decision adverse to Pro-Life activists. Pro-Choice advocates seem to vindicate abortion, accepting that abortion is not considered a form of birth control, but merely a method of controlling the woman and fetus future. Women are the sole determinate persons in stating if they are capable of withholding a full term pregnancy.
As an advocate of women’s right’s to Pro choice, I am extending my viewpoints to you in this proposition. Many people have their opinions on abortion, usually being one extreme or the other. Advocates or Pro choice often finds themselves swaying their opinions of when abortion is morally ethical dependent upon the controlling factors. Advocates of Pro Life are consistently perusing abortion, stating that it is morally wrong, and unethical in all matters, even if the pregnancy is inadvertent. There are factors remaining in today’s society that are very forthcoming and are unanticipated by women in the prevention of pregnancy. If medical doctors abolished the procedure, or if the government made it even more difficult to obtain an abortion, we wouldn’t be supporting the righteousness of many women in the U.S. today. If contraception, in all forms, were 100% effective, then abortion could be abolished. Until medical research and testing finds a foolproof contraceptive, abortion is morally permissible because of obvious factors that are uncontrollable.
For those whom agree that abortion is an ethical procedure, there are some instances where it is morally questionable. Does an inopportune pregnancy allow another to be the decider on the future life of a fetus? As Marquis states, “an FLO is to claim that a fetus now has the potential to be in a state of a certain kind in the future”. (143) If a woman chooses to abort the fetus, according to Marquis, she is depriving it of the future it could possibly have. This would be more relevant to comprehend if one knew that the fetus would be born completely healthy. It is not known in the early stages of pregnancy if
the fetus will be born without abnormalities, or defects. Therefor, it is impossible to state that the fetus would ever even see a “FLO”. It is wrong to kill peaceful or harmless persons, as Marquis argues, “the FLO account of the wrongness of killing is correct because it explains why we believe that killing is one of the worst of crimes.”(141) Would it also be wrong to place an individual in the world that is handicapped, deformed, or otherwise incompetent? Abortion is an inexpensive procedure to prevent this from occurring. If a woman knows that the fetus will more than likely not have a “FLO”, then she is correct in deciding on terminating her pregnancy. The determinants to this would be from being unfit or unplanned. If the woman is unhealthy in any way, then that creates an atmosphere for the unborn child that is unhealthy as well.
Pro-choice followers do feel that there is a time when abortion is immoral and unethical, which is aborting after the second trimester. By the third trimester, a fetus has formed distinct facial features, digits, limbs, and internal organs. To anyone, this would be the equivalent to the physical human person. Warren states that, “the late term fetus has features which cause it to arouse in us almost the same powerful protective instinct as does a small infant.” (133) The consequences of aborting late in the pregnancy can be dangerous to the woman’s well being. It can cause mental and physical trauma a woman may not be prepared to undergo. If the circumstances were that bearing the fetus could pose a life or health threat to the woman, then it is accepted by Pro-choice believers to abort after the second trimester. This does not entail killing the fetus- usually labor is induced, and the infant is placed in an Intensive Care Unit. The mental trauma is still sustained, but the future life and health of the woman is known.
Pro-life activists do not see abortion as an option at any time, even if the circumstances incurring the pregnancy stem from an uncontrollable mean. When a woman endures a pregnancy stemming from faulty contraception, the pregnancy is unexpected. She may not have the resources like income, shelter, and food to provide for the unborn infant. Pro-life activists believe there is always a way to fulfill a pregnancy, and never turn to abortion. In case of a molestation or rape, Pro-life followers tend to direct the woman towards adoption services, or orphanages. To Pro-life believers, the cost of adoption is incomparable to the cost a life. If finances decide bringing a child into the world, then Pro-life activists believe there is no reason not to fulfill a pregnancy. They will raise funds, or incorporate funding from the government to support an infant that can not be raised by the mother. Pro-life activists have set up hotline numbers to call, adoption services, and reference services for those who need a guide through their pregnancy. Single mothers seek help from these inexpensive services, which are mostly paid for from federal funding. Overall, there should not ever be reasons to turn to abortion if you are a Pro-life supporter, or are there? The government funds some or most of the costs for a child’s nourishment, shelter, and health. Should the government also fund the costs of treating an aberrant infant? If an infant were born premature, due to environmental or maternal factors, the cost of medical aide to keep the infant alive would be flagitious. How do we determine the financial cost of a life? It is impossible, so the government continues to provide financial aid to those in need, with each case of need being different. Few women need tremendous medical and financial aid; others need little or no government assistance. With that in mind, Pro-life activists will seek federal funding to support an infant’s life.
There still remain factors of imperfect contraception. Today’s medical research and testing has given women the choice of several contraceptive devices. Included is the controversial “morning after pill”, IUD’s, oral contraceptive known as “the pill”, Norplant, Depo- Provera, sponges, cervical caps, and now the female condom. The pill is the most effective out of the available types, but still it is not 100% effective towards pregnancy prevention. The pill is ranked first choice (after abstinence) among women for effective means of birth control; Norplant and Depo-Provera are ranked thereafter, then IUD’s, the female condom, then sponges, and cervical caps. The morning after pill is an emergency pregnancy prevention form of birth control. It is the only choice for women that is more effective than the pill. It brings on a “natural” aborting of the united zygote, still considered abortion. Many Pro choice advocates dislike the idea of self induced abortion, stating that it gives a woman the ability to induce a harmful process unto her body. Pro life activists are completely against the idea of placing a future childs’ destiny in the hands of the irresponsible mother. Nonetheless, it is abortion- in another fashion. Until a contraceptive is researched, tested, and marketed, there is no real way to prevent a pregnancy, unless a woman abstains. There are the cases of pregnancy incurred from rape. If this so just be the case, and a woman has access to “the morning after pill”, then it is acceptable for her to take the pill to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. There is not a completely effective means of birth control available yet, to the public. If there were, then abortion could be abolished, and unwanted pregnancies wouldn’t occur.
In conclusion, abortion is the intentional termination of pregnancy resulting in the death of the fetus. A fetus is a person and has a right to life. I believe Immanuel Kant would suggest that maybe a woman has a duty to abort a child for the mere fact that she has a duty not to bring that child into the world. On the other hand, he might state that she has a duty to give that child the right to live life to the fullest. The child may lead a prosperous life that leads to happiness and aborting it would deprive that. We as people have a moral duty to do what is ethically correct for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarianism is acting so as to produce the greatest possible balance of good over bad for everyone affected by our actions according to John Stuart Mill (51). Legalizing abortion affects us all. If no one were able to have an abortion, then everyone would have an equal right to life. Who is to say that is not for the greatest balance of good over bad for everyone. Abortion is seriously wrong except perhaps in rare cases.