Abortion

The development of new ideas, inventions and technologies on medical science has

brought more ethical issues on this field (Wikipedia, 2011). Views on such ethical subjects

frequently, if not always, challenge the moral, legal, individual and social issues of the topic

(Punkerslut, 2011).

This essay will treat one of the controversial ethical issue that was and still widely

debated- ABORTION. This paper will look and relate the contrasting sides that polarized

views of people for decades now, while it seeks to understand factors surrounding the most

concerned individual in abortion- the pregnant woman and the unborn being inside her

womb.

For purposes of discussion, the writing will take the case of Ms Susan, aged 15 years old

who was impregnated by her 23 year old boyfriend and has decided to go for an abortion.

When she reached the clinic, she requested for the procedure but the doctor told her that she

has to get the consent of her parents. She refused and was crying pleading with the doctor that

her parents would literally ‘kill her’ if this was made known to them. She returns home

without performing the procedure that day.

The church, other religious groups and its allies who have conservative view claims

ethical take on the issue. Briefly they defined abortion as a “loss of a fetal life” (Catholic

Encyclopaedia, 2009). Legal view however also claim existence of moral right on abortion

laws that allow restricted or regulated practice and attached more liberal meaning to it, as

1
–“the premature termination of a pregnancy” (Your Dictionary, 2010). In medical field,

where the procedure has becoming part of modern practice, simply defined it as, “the

premature exit of the products of conception from the uterus” (MediciNet, 2011). Looking at

the terms “loss”, “termination” and “exit of the product” as they are used to define abortion

already described diversity of level on how each see the value of “life” of the unborn into that

of a pregnant woman. These alone can spell how each will stand on the issue of abortion.

Beyond the above contrasting perceptions on the concept of word abortion, are following

facts about it that could broaden our understanding of the issue.

Overview of abortion revealed that there are 42 million cases per year which equates to

approximately 115,000 abortions per day worldwide; this is equal to the 32% of daily birth

rate (The Allan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), as cited in The Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform

[CBR], 2010, Yahoo, 2011). Of these abortion cases, 83% come from developing nations and

17% occurs in developed countries (AGI as cited in CBR, 2010). USA, in year 2001,

recorded 6.4 million pregnancies and 1.3 million of those ended in abortions. 52% of women

undergoing abortion are younger than 25: Teenagers obtaining 20% of it (Currie, 2000). 93%

of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient), 6%

because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child (CBR, 2011). The

city state of Singapore recorded 12, 222 abortions in 2008, a slight increase from 11,933 of

2007 (Agence France Presse [AFP], 2009). Both countries have laws allowing termination of

pregnancy. Susan’s case if the procedure was pushed will be an additional number to these

figures.

2
 Going to the heart of the matter, before we could categorize the decision made by Susan

and arrive to a judgement, it is but fitting at this point to lay and analyze arguments and

claims at grounds of ethical, legal, social and other issues surrounding abortion.

First on list is the argument of ethics. The claim “there’s a moral right to abortion”

remains the primary issue (Beuchamp & Childress, 2001). One of the questions central to this

debate is the “moral status” of the unborn. To understand this point, let’s look at what moral

status is? The concept can be illustrated that: if X has a moral status, it is always wrong to

destroy X, and X has a right to respect (life, help, care, etc.), and with that, Y has a moral

obligation with regard to X. (Louhiala, 2009) In the words of Edward and Warren (as cited

in Louhiala, 2009), if something has moral status, it is worthy of moral consideration, and we

have, or can have, moral obligations towards it. The concept is vague but one thing here is

clear, in order to claim or negate existence of moral right on Susan decision to terminate her

pregnancy, it is imperative to establish or refute the existence of moral status on her unborn

baby because the result of argument will support your stand towards the issue. The pressing

question then is, do that unborn have a moral status, and if it does, when do this exist?

Pro-choice had criteria to how and when this moral status is born. Steinbock (as cited in

Beuchamp & Childress, 2001) explained that unlike a late-gestation fetus or new born baby,

embrayo and early fetuses lacks moral status since they have yet to have consciousness,

sentient- the capacity to feel or perceive – and interest which are essential for moral status to

exist. Further that, not until after 22-24 weeks age of gestation when the neural pathways are

sufficiently developed to transmit neural message to the fetal brain cortex, fetus is not

sentient to experience anything that abortion may bring or unlikely to have conscious

awareness on the loss of her life to the procedure (Beuchamp, T.L. & Childress, J.F., 2001).

3
Furthermore, fetus interest to have its own life at this stage is not yet present, so no one has

moral obligation to protect an interest which at that point fetus yet to posses. Another

argument point out is the woman’s moral right to bodily self determination (Steinbock, as

cited in Beuchamp & Childress, 2001). That she alone has the right to determine what she

want to do with her body, including the right to choice on whether to terminate or continue

her pregnancy. These are the major claim by pro-choice and asserts that it justify morality to

an abortion.

Pro-life on contrary, negate that moral claim and stand firm on the conservative position

that attached moral significance of the genetic humanity of the fetus and argues that this

humanity is present from conception onwards and not just on certain later stage of

development (Callahan, as cited in Beuchamp & Childress, 2001). It claims that the unborn is

a “potential” person with rights to potential life, future, dreams and happiness and it should

not be denied of that and other rights or other form of protection that accorded to a normal

person. Negates further, that the right of a woman like any other right is not absolute and

should not out weight the equal right that of the fetus have and should entitled of protection

and respect. As such, no cause can justify the deliberation killing of the unborn. Abortion to

pro-life is morally wrong. Susan, if her pregnancy fits the view of Steinbock, may find allies

on pro-choice groups, on the other hand, whatever reason she may invoke for going to that

clinic will not justify the decision she made, if the pro-life will be asked.

Dispute between pro-life and pro-choice extends at the battle of legal topic, the second

issue of debate (David, Musser & Lovelace, 2010). Most basis of legislated law on abortion

can be seen on won decided cases. The case on Roe v. Wade, the US Supreme Court ruled

that women had a constitutional right to abortion, and that right was based on an implied right

4
to personal privacy, the Court said that a fetus is not a person but "potential life," and thus

does not have constitutional rights of its own, which pro-life firmly opposed (United

Conference Catholic Bishop, [UCCB], 2010). In other key case, Doe v. Bolton, Court ruled

that a woman's right to abortion could not be limited by the state if abortion was sought for

reasons of maternal health (David, Musser & Lovelace, 2010 ). Development of legalization

of abortion laws at other part of world traced back in Soviet Union, with the legislation in

1920, and Iceland, in 1935, two of the first countries to generally allow abortion. The second

half of the 20th century saw the liberalization of abortion laws in other countries. In United

Kingdom (except Northern Ireland) passed Abortion Act 1967 which allowed abortion for

limited reasons (Wikipedia, 2011). In 1974 Singapore similarly enacted a Termination of

Pregnancy Act. The law was passed to provide for the safe termination of unwanted

pregnancies by trained persons in appropriately equipped facilities, safeguard the health and

well-being of the woman and to ensure that all children born in Singapore are wanted

children (Ministry of Health, 2008). In Canada, the Supreme Court , in the case of R. v.

Morgentaler, discarded its criminal code regarding abortion in 1988, after ruling that such

restrictions violated the security of person guaranteed to women under the Canadian Charter

of Rights and Freedoms (Wikipedia, 2011).

Looking at these cases it’s interesting to find that most decisions are made to resonates

the stand claim by pro-choice. The individual arguments on legal basis of the rulings that

given birth to legislation of abortion laws may appear to be different, but scrutinizing closely,

it will boil down to just few fundamental reasons- to protect the right or interest not of the

unborn but that of a woman, state or society. Exception however was the case of Ireland,

where in 1983, addition of an amendment to the Irish Constitution was made by popular

referendum, recognizing "the right to life of the unborn" (Wikipedia, 2011). These facts show

5
that in a society where law permits total or regulated abortion, the real contrast would be

between the State that legalize it and the pro-life who questions the basis of its legality. At the

other end, where the State forbids, battle will be at the pro-choice who clamour for the legal

access abortion and the government that penalize its illegal practice.

The social perception on the issue, though not much debated by the pro-life and pro-

choice, is still interesting to know. Social take on the argument is gauged on aggregated view

of individual of particular society (Bacon, 2004). The result of arguments and claims reflect

the society’s moral and legal sentiment and view. On this basis, judgement - whether the

society is of pro-life and pro-choice - can then be drawn.

Analysis of facts indicates that abortion indeed a worldwide issue. Question on the

relationship between ethics (moral) and law (legal) as they relate to abortion foremost draw

interest to many and it surfaces increasingly on bioethics courses, subjects, discussions and

debates (Herrera, 200). Over the years of debate, two conflicting sides have immerged, the

“pro-life” against the “pro-choice”. Presentation of polarized arguments and claims of these

stances would show how diverse the issue was and still is. Stand of society can not be

discounted also, since the aggregated perception would reflect the general picture of social

consensus on the surrounding issues.

In conclusion, applying Susan’s case in Singapore, a State where Buddhism and

Christianity dominated religion, many members may regard Susan’s act as immoral

(Wikipedia, 2011). However, such view cannot override the State claims of legal morality of

the legislated law that warrant and protect such act. Going to the merit of the case, the

premise of her age and consent should be discounted since the provision of the law is silent

6
about it (Termination of Pregnancy Act, 2007). In fact, the Law only provided that it is

mandatory to refer an unmarried girl below 16 years of age for pre-abortion counseling at the

Health Promotion Board Counseling Centre (Ministry of Health, 2004). Thus, irregardless of

the doctor’s religious affiliation and personal belief on the issue of abortion, if he is an

authorised medical practitioner as mandated under same Act, and further, if after all other

requirements are met by the requesting party, it is his duty to responded on the request of

Susan to facilitate safe abortion, otherwise the doctor is legally liable of his action

(Termination of Pregnancy Act, 2007).

Finally, personal view on abortion whether influenced by pro-life or pro-choice

arguments, claims and belief for whatever reason should not cloud ones judgement towards

the case of Susan or other similar cases, every judgement must be based most on merit of the

case and surrounding circumstances, taking into account the value of respect. Thus, Susan’s

decision to terminate her pregnancy should be viewed with open mind and understanding of

the surrounding circumstances.

7
References:

Agence France Presse. (2009). Singapore sees abortions rise amid recession. Retrieved

January 9, 2011, from http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/

article/ALeqM5hsDmS_8xiDK-Qtvp-85c_ZEhv1Gw

Bacon, B. (2004). World issues abortion. Bramley, London: Chrysalis Children’s Books

Beuchamp, T.L. & Childress, J.F. (2001). In Principle of biomedical ethics (5th ed.). New

York, NY: Oxford university press.

Catholic Encyclopaedia. (2009). Abortion. Retrieved January 5, 2011, from

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01046b.htm

Chen, A.J. , Emmanuel, S.C. , Ling, S.L & Kwa, S.B. (1985). Legalized abortion: The

Singapore experience. Studies In Family Planning, 16, 170-178

Currie, S. (2000). Abortion. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press.

David, H., Musser, S. & Lovelace, K. (2010). Abortion. Detroit, MI: Greenhaven Press.

Farrell, C. (2008). The abortion debate. Edina , Minnesota: Abdo Publishing Company.

Herrera, D. (2000). How are Law and Ethics Related. Retrieved January 17, 2010, from

http://www-hsc.usc.edu/~mbernste/tae.ethics&law.herrera.html

8
Louhiala, P. (2009). Preventing Intellectual Disability: Ethical and Clinical Issues. Retried

January 11, 2011, from http://ebooks.cambridge.org/chapter.jsf?bid

=CBO9780511543982&cid=CBO9780511543982A048&p=10

Medicine Net. (2011). Definition of Abortion. Retrieved January 7, 2011, from

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=2091

Ministry of Health, Singapore. (2008). News: Parliamentary QA: Abortion; Guidelines on

Termination of Pregnancy.

Retrieved January 15, 2011, from http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/ parliamentaryqa. aspx?

id=19828.

Punkerslut (2011). The Ethics of Abortion. Retrieved January 4, 2011, from

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/12-21-2005-84521.asp

Singapore Government Statues. (2007). Termination of Pregnancy Act. Retrieved January 3,

2011, from http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_legdisp.pl?actno=1974-

REVED-324&date=20101215&method=whole& doctitle

The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform. (2010). Abortion Facts. Retrieved January 8, 2010, from

http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html

United Conference Catholic Bishop, (2010). Summary of Roe v. Wade

9
and Other Key Abortion Cases. Retrieved January 13, 2011, from

http://www.nccbuscc.org/prolife/issues/abortion/roevwade/CaseSummariesforwebsite4-

18.pdf

Wikipedia. (2011). Abortion. Retrieved January 3, 2010, from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion#Induced

Your Dictionary. (2010). Abortion Law Definition. Retrieved January 5, 2010, from

http://law.yourdictionary.com/abortion

10
11