1

Applied Ethics of The Roe Vs. Wade Abortion Case

Students' Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course Code

Instructors' Name

Date
 2

Applied Ethics of The Roe Vs. Wade Abortion Case

There has been recent news on the challenging of the Roe vs. Wade abortion case, and

even the issue was taken back to the supreme court recently. In 1973, the United States

Supreme Court issued a ruling concerning the Roe Vs. Wade case that legalized abortion

throughout the country. The case was brought to the court by Norma, who had become

pregnant and wanted an abortion but was unable to obtain one legally (Crawford et al., 2021).

The decision overturned all state laws that banned or restricted abortion, and it has been the

subject of much controversy ever since. The possible solutions of the case will be evaluated

based on the utilitarian theory and Kant's theory.

Supporters of Roe Vs. Wade argue that the ruling was necessary to protect women's

rights and ensure that they could make their own decisions about their pregnancies. They

point out that abortion is a safe and legal procedure and that women should not be forced to

carry unwanted pregnancies to term (Dyer, 2020). Opponents of Roe Vs. Wade argue that the

decision was wrong and should be overturned. They say that abortion is a form of murder and

that it should be illegal except in cases where the mother's life is in danger. They also argue

that the decision was based on flawed reasoning and that the court should overturn it.

The Roe Vs. Wade decision has been a source of controversy for more than 40 years,

and it is likely to continue to be a topic of debate in the U.S(Crawford et al., 2021).

Supporters of the right to abort argue that the decision was necessary to protect women's

rights, while opponents argue it was wrong and should be overturned.

There are two solutions to the Roe Vs. Wade abortion case that can be presented to

the Supreme Court. The first solution is to overturn Roe Vs. Wade makes the states make

their own decisions. This would allow each state to determine its stance on abortion. The

second solution is to uphold Roe Vs. Wade and confirm aborting acts (Kahn, 2019). This
 3

would protect the right to an abortion for all women in the United States. Both solutions have

their pros and cons, and it will be up to the Supreme Court to decide which solution is best

for the country.

If the Supreme Court overturned Roe Vs. Wade, it would be a major blow to women's

rights. Abortion would no longer be a right, and it would be up to each state to determine its

own stance on the issue. This could lead to some states having very restrictive abortion laws,

while other states would have more liberal laws (Stockton, 2021). Furthermore, it would be

up to the woman to travel to a state with more liberal laws if she wanted an abortion, which

would be difficult and expensive.

If the Supreme Court upholds Roe Vs. Wade, it will protect a woman's right to

abortion. This is important, as it would ensure that all women have the same abortion rights.

It would also prevent states from passing restrictive abortion laws (Dyer, 2020). However, it

could lead to more abortions being performed, as women would be able to get an abortion

without having to travel to another state. It will be up to the Supreme Court to decide which

solution is best for the country.

The utilitarianism theory supports the Roe v. Wade case because it upholds the

principle that the greatest good for the greatest number of people is the most important

consideration in making decisions. In this case, upholding a woman's right to choose whether

or not to have an abortion does just that – it benefits the greatest number of people by

allowing them to make their own decisions about their reproductive health (Crawford et al.,

2021). Moreover, the utilitarianism theory also considers the principle of diminishing

marginal utility, which means that the value of a good or service decreases as more and more

of it is produced.
 4

In this case, by allowing women to have abortions, the number of abortions performed

will decrease over time as people will only get abortions if they feel that they have no other

choice. This is because people using utilitarianism to make their decision will be more likely

to choose an abortion if they believe that it is the best option for everyone involved (Kahn,

2019). This will lead to fewer abortions being performed and happier and healthier women.

Kant's theory against abortion is primarily based on the belief that humans are rational

beings capable of making moral decisions. Kant believes that all humans have a duty to

protect innocent life, and abortion violates this principle (Murray & Khan, 2020).

Additionally, Kant believes that the pregnant woman should decide to terminate a pregnancy,

not by someone else.

Critics of Kant's theory argue that it does not consider the difficult circumstances that

may lead a woman to choose abortion. For example, a woman may choose to terminate her

pregnancy if she is unable to provide for her child due to financial constraints. However,

Kant would argue that the woman should still find a way to provide for her child, even if it

means making difficult decisions. Ultimately, Kant's theory against abortion is based on the

belief that all life is valuable and should be protected (Kahn, 2019). While this belief may be

difficult to uphold in certain cases, it is a principle that most people can agree with.

The utilitarian theory is the best to follow based on the above solutions because

evaluation will always be done to determine the best good. A few different perspectives of

utilitarian theories could be used to support abortion. The first is the act utilitarian theory.

This theory states that the consequences of an act determine whether or not it is morally

correct. In the case of abortion, the act would be terminating a pregnancy, and the

consequences would be the happiness of the mother and any potential children she may have
 5

in the future (Stockton, 2021). The second theory is the rule utilitarian theory. This theory

states that the consequences of a rule are what determine whether or not it is morally correct.

In the case of abortion from the roe and wade case, the rule would be that it is morally

acceptable to end a pregnancy if doing so would result in more happiness than unhappiness.

The final theory is the total utilitarian theory. This theory states that the consequences of all

acts are taken into account when determining whether or not they are morally correct. In the

case of abortion, this would mean that the happiness of the mother and any potential children

she may have in the future would be weighed against the unhappiness of the foetus.
 6

References

Crawford, B. L., Jozkowski, K. N., Turner, R. C., & Lo, W. J. (2021). Examining the

relationship between Roe v. Wade knowledge and sentiment across political party and

abortion identity. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 1-12.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-021-00597-4

Dyer, O. (2020). U.S. Supreme Court hears pivotal abortion cases as pro-lifers seek to

undermine Roe v Wade. BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online), 368.

https://www.proquest.com/openview/251fd0a2b5a156ff8eef75f1948481c8/1?pq-

origsite=gscholar&cbl=2043523

Stockton, R. R. (2021). Will Roe Survive? The Mississippi Challenge, 2021.

Kahn, L. (2019). Is There an Obligation to Abort?: Act Utilitarianism and the Ethics of

Procreation. Essays in Philosophy, 20(1), 24-41. https://doi.org/10.7710/1526-

0569.1622

Murray, L., & Khan, N. (2020). The im/mobilities of 'sometimes-migrating for abortion:

Ireland to Great Britain. Mobilities, 15(2), 161-172.

https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2020.1730637