MRT5120 Abortion - Roger Tirazona

1

The Abortion Debate – Pros and Cons By Roger Tirazona B.Psy PGCE PSD – 535279M MA. Bioethics Candidate Semester 2 -‐ 2012

MRT5120-‐SEM2-‐AE: Public Policy and Ethics at the Edges of Human Life

Abstract

Though the field of Bioethics is preoccupied with a wide variety of issues, there are none

that have been challenged, vehemently argued for and against and raised enough

eyebrows as the issue of abortion. This assignment will tersely discuss the principal

arguments that are put forward by the lobbies in favour and against abortion. The issue

is so historically rooted and so much research has been done about it and so many

people have spoken about, that it is impossible to be all-‐encompassing for the purposes

of this assignment. Some of the arguments for and against, have reached an intricate

stalemate and the rhetoric that has been used by the two lobbies has now become

inescapable and turned full circle. If this debate hopes to ever reach any sort of closure,

new avenues of thinking and more mature approaches need to be sought and added to

the discourse.

2

Table of Contents

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3

The Hippocratic Oath ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Abortion and Eugenics ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 Roe v. Wade ............................................................................................................................................................................ 6

Medical Perspectives .......................................................................................................... 8

The Idea of Viability ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 The Safety of Women ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 Post Abortion Traumas ................................................................................................................................................... 11 Late Term Abortions ........................................................................................................................................................ 13

The Personhood Debate .................................................................................................... 15

Why is the foetus not a person? ................................................................................................................................... 15 Neurological reasons? ...................................................................................................................................................... 16

Feminism, Rights and Reason ............................................................................................ 19

Beyond the rhetoric of Personhood ........................................................................................................................... 19 Father’s Rights .................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Consistency ........................................................................................................................................................................... 22

Abortion and Religion ....................................................................................................... 23

The Shaping of Society ...................................................................................................... 25

Disability issues .................................................................................................................................................................. 25 Demographics ...................................................................................................................................................................... 26

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 28

Bibliography ...................................................................................................................... 29

3

Introduction

In order to discuss the topic of Abortion, one must first start by defining the term. When

researching, various definitions of abortion crop up with varying jargon or varying

provisos that show both the agenda of the information giver, or that level of

permissibility of the abortive procedure by the institution or the context where abortion

is being defined. This assignment will investigate tersely, key perspectives and ethics of

abortion that will argue in favour or against it.

The Catholic Online Encyclopaedia gives the Etymological definition of the word

“abortion”, from Latin aboriri, which means to perish; referring to the perishing of foetal

life. (Coppens, 1907) Under this etymological definition, any form of loss of foetal or

embryonic life, even under accidental circumstances, would constitute an abortion.

However it is not the case that the modern use of the word abortion encompasses such a

wide definition. Nowadays, the word “abortion” refers more to how medical

practitioners refer to abortion; i.e. the termination of pregnancy by the removal or

expulsion from the uterus of a foetus or embryo prior to viability. An indefinite variation

of this definition can be found in most medical, obstetric and gynaecological textbooks.

The word “viability” refers to the foetus’ capability of independent survival outside the

Uterus, which already is implying certain ethics of abortion within this definition.

Some textbooks also feel the need to specify between a spontaneous abortion

(what one would usually call a miscarriage) and an intended abortion, which is the wilful

expulsion or removal of the foetus. This wider view of abortion, is perhaps closer to the

etymology of the word abortion. Other textbooks do not specify the difference, taking it

for granted that abortion refers to the latter scenario. However, since there are certain

medical dictionaries that consider abortion to also refer to the spontaneous abortion, for

the purposes of this assignment, “abortion” is defined as the wilful induced expulsion of

the product of conception, embryo or foetus. Viability is a concept with ethical

considerations that will be discussed further in this assignment.

When discussing the pro arguments of abortion and the contra arguments of

abortion, one has to also start from understanding the role that abortion has played in

4

History. In the case of abortion, Bioethicists are not facing a phenomenon that is cutting

edge, modern scientific or medical technology, but a procedure that has deep-‐seated

roots even in Ancient History. The need for the termination of a pregnancy is something

that may go back to the dawn of humanity, but the first archaeological record that we

have is from the Ancient Egyptian Ebers Papyrus of 1550 BCE. Other records come from

half a world over, from 515 BCE China. Archaeological discoveries indicate early surgical

attempts at the extraction of a foetus; however, such procedures are not believed to have

been common, given the infrequency with which they are mentioned in ancient medical

texts. (Potts & Campbell, 2009) There are Maltese records about abortion, dating back to

the 18th century, recording a Modesta Bravin terminating her pregnancy with an

abortifacient potion, procured to her by the chemist Giovanni Angelo Sammut. (Ciappara,

1988)

Natural Abortifacients were in fact widely used in the Ancient World and some

are actually prescribed as herbal “remedies” for unwanted pregnancies on certain online

sources for alternative medicine. Black Hellebore (Helleborus niger) is a known

abortifacient and emmenagogue that was used in the ancient world and is known to be

used till this day. (Riddle, 1992, p. 34)

The Hippocratic Oath

One of the arguments brought forward by the anti-‐abortion voices, is that Abortion is

against the Hippocratic Oath, the oath that doctors take upon their graduation where

they pledge to do no harm. This tradition dates back to the ancient Greek physician

Hippocrates c. 460 – 370 BCE. The original Hippocratic Oath contained the line “I will

give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and similarly I

will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.” Some interpret this line saying

that therefore, Abortion goes against the oath, however others say that Hippocrates was

not against abortion, but against the use of the pessary itself, which was known to cause

fatal vaginal ulcers.

5

Hippocrates himself is thought to have advised abortions from his attributed

writings. He writes advising a prostitute who became pregnant to “jump up and down,

touching her buttocks with her heels at each leap to induce a miscarriage”. (Lefkowitz &

Fant, 1992, p. 341) Other writings attributed to him describe instruments that were

fashioned to dilate the cervix and curette the Uterus, a procedure that is used till this day

as a means of procuring an abortion. (Klotz, 1973) Later editions of the Hippocratic oath

have removed the mention of abortion, which many interpret has allowed the

permissibility of abortion under the Hippocratic Oath. However anti-‐abortion voices

argue “even without referencing abortion directly, the doctors who take this oath (if

they're honest) are still committing themselves to the preservation of human life, which

can be traced back all the way to the moment of conception.” (Abort73.com, 2010) Such a

statement however, is based on the assumption that human life begins from the moment

of conception; an argument that deserves its own ethical considerations later on in this

assignment.

Abortion and Eugenics

In the 19th Century; Francis Galton interpreted Mendelian Inheritance, Darwinian

Natural Selection and the idea of survival of the fittest, as something that one should base

his society on (committing the Naturalistic Fallacy, that Homo sapiens should repeat that

which is observed in nature for the species to flourish). He therefore started the Eugenic

movement, that eventually prescribed the “genetic improvement of a population” by

means of sterilisation, contraception and abortion of the “unfit”.

20th Century Eugenics in America married the Feminist movement; Margaret

Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood and was also involved in the “negro

project” and even gave talks at the KKK. Sanger’s Eugenic instrument of choice was

always contraception however and never abortion. It was after Sanger’s death that the

Eugenics, Feminist and Reproductive Rights movement expanded to include abortion in

their agenda. (Sanger, Margaret Sanger, An Autobiography, 1938, pp. 366-367)

6

Sanger wrote in her book Woman and the New Race, "while there are cases where

even the law recognises an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert

that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a

disgrace to civilisation." (Sanger, Women and the New Race, 1920)

It is therefore evident, that one of the most vociferous proponents of abortion,

Planned Parenthood, though not originally intended by its founder to be such, however

started off as a racially-‐motivated population control. It was later, after Sanger’s Death

that Abortion and the Eugenic movement took over institutions like planned parenthood

to push their eugenic agenda. C.P. Blacker noted that: " The Society's activities in crypto-‐

eugenics should be pursued vigorously, and specifically that the Society should increase

its monetary support of the FPA [Family Planning Association, the English branch of

Planned Parenthood] and the IPPF [International Planned Parenthood Federation] and

should make contact with the Society for the Study of Human Biology, which already has

a strong and active membership, to find out if any relevant projects are contemplated

with which the Eugenics Society could assist". (all.org, 1999)

The fact that planned parenthood grew out of the eugenics movement and that C.

P. Blacker was the Chairman of IPPF and wishing to implement a surreptitious eugenics

agenda, raises valid questions about the agenda of the proliferation of abortion as a

means of Birth Control. It is perhaps one of the major arguments against abortion,

because if there is anything that is more globally repudiated than abortion, it is the

discriminatory and racist eugenic agenda. What started as a feminist, though racially-‐

motivated movement, was taken over by persons who had an agenda to control the

population of those deemed “less valid”.

Roe v. Wade

The 1973 milestone case where the Supreme Court, feeling compelled to protect

women’s rights and the issue of reproductive health, granted the right to abort in all of

the Unites States of America making the enforcing of anti-‐abortion laws unconstitutional.

“In a 7 – 2 vote, the Court said that the Texas law violated the due process clause of the

14th Constitutional Amendment. Justice Harry Blackmun, writing for the majorit, argued

7

that a woman’s decision to end her pregnancy is protected by a broad right of privacy,

which though not explicitly laid out in the Constitution, previously had been found by the

court to exist within the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th and 14th as well as the penumbras, or shadows, of

the Bill of Rights.” (PBS.ORG Broadcast, 2006)

Roe v. Wade also failed to protect the moral status of the foetus where it stated

that the foetus is not a person that is protected by the 14th Constitutional amendment,

which says that “no state shall deprive a person of life, liberty or property, without the

due process of law.” The foetus is not a person and therefore unprotected by this

amendment. However the Supreme court failed to give a convincing argument to why

the foetus is not a person, recognising the difficulty to do so. The Supreme Court said:

"We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins...the judiciary at this point

in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the

answer." (prolifewisconsin.org, 2012) This lack of a thesis for personhood is perhaps the

strongest opposition there is to the Roe v. Wade decision.

Since Roe v. Wade, many state-‐specific restrictions have been lobbied, till

recently, to restrict the access of abortion. These include measures such as parental

consent, spousal notification, mandatory ultrasounds prior to abortion, full informed

consent, etc. Bioethicist Richard McCormick, in his journal entry entitled “Theology and

Bioethics”, discussed how Theologians needed to be more vocal in the field of Bioethics

in the 60’s and 70’s. Perhaps, the public opinion and the result of the case could have

been different if ethicists were more vociferous. (McCormick, 1989, pp. 5-‐10)

8

Medical Perspectives

Medicine and abortion were inextricably intertwined since antiquity, obviously because

abortion is a medical procedure; whether it is procured surgically or pharmaceutically.

Medical Science and Ethics are therefore crucial in the abortion debate. People

interested in the ethics of abortion turn to medicine and medical practitioners for the

following sort of information and perspectives:

1. whether medical knowledge clarifies the moral status of the foetus as a human

being;

2. whether medical information on abortion confirms it to be safe for the woman;

3. what the medical perspectives are on performing early versus late abortions,

particularly in light of controversies regarding partial birth abortion;

4. what the public health and international perspectives are on abortion. (Post, 2004,

pp. 1-49, 1)

Science, being based on empiricism is referred to for conclusive answers to

questions such as “when does human life begin?” But “what is life?” is a question that

should be asked first before deciding to enquire “when” is it present. It is like asking

someone who had a horse carriage all his life and never saw a car, to answer “when can

we call a means of transport a car?”. Is life something that is measurable empirically? Can

one really draw lines on when is it present? The Encyclopedia of Bioethics states that

“However much information biomedical investigation may provide regarding pregnancy,

foetal development, and abortion, it cannot provide a determination as to when human

life begins. The answer to that question—which deals with the moral status of the

foetus—is arrived at by a process that entwines medical facts with experiences, values,

religious and philosophical beliefs and attitudes, perceptions of meaning, and moral

argument. Such a process extends beyond the special competency of medicine.” (Post,

2004, pp. 1-49) Science cannot and does not answer a question that is philosophical and

metaphysical in nature, and for a medical scientist to say life starts “here” or “there” and

saying that Science shows this, may be both unscientific and presumptuous.

There are many doctors however that see the unborn as a full member of society.

Dr. Bernard N. Nathanson, who was the co-‐founder of the National Abortion Rights

9

Action League (NARAL), an abortionist himself who later turned into a pro-‐life activist,

puts forward the argument, that before the science of “Foetology”, there was doubt on

what was the status of the unborn child. But with modern scanning and diagnostic

techniques, there is now no doubt that the obstetrician and gynaecologist, had to treat

the unborn child as a “second patient”. (Nathanson, 1984)

The Idea of Viability

Many medical practitioners and abortion legislators, define the permissibility, or lack

thereof, of abortion with respect to the viability of the unborn. Viability refers to a point

in foetal development at which the foetus may survive outside a womb. The lower limit

of viability is approximately five months gestational age, and usually later. (Hamalek,

2003) According to Hamalek: “most neonatologists would agree that survival of infants

younger than approximately 22 to 23 weeks’ estimated gestational age [i.e. 20 to 21

weeks' estimated fertilization age] is universally dismal and that resuscitative efforts

should not be undertaken when a neonate is born at this point in pregnancy.” (Hamalek,

2003) This statement is in 2003, and it is granted that a foetus born at this gestation age

has very little chance of survival, however one would be careful to judge whether one

ought or ought not to offer resuscitation, because as science progresses, the resuscitation

and incubation techniques of pre-‐term unborn foeti is improving, thus increasing

survivability. Therefore, with this consideration at hand, one should revise the idea of

viability accordingly rather than keep it a static, ironclad “24 week” line that is drawn

arbitrarily. Studies show that there can be factors that can improve pre-‐term Birth

survivability, even at gestation week 22 or earlier. Therefore definitions of abortion,

both medical and legal, that speak of permissibility of abortion in terms of foetal

viability, could be drawing arbitrary lines that are not necessarily founded in medical

science, since preterm survivability is constantly improving and there is no telling

whether a foetus can or cannot survive at a certain gestation age.

10

The Safety of Women

The notion of safety, is one that is used most vigorously by both the ones lobbying in

favour and against abortion and it is a very strong argument both for and against

abortion.

Terminating a pregnancy can have a profound effect on the female body, whether

it is spontaneous or induced. The induction of abortion, can be procured in various

ways, each having their own possible side-‐effects that can be potentially harmful to the

woman. It is however fair to distinguish between a “safe abortion” and an “unsafe

abortion”. Even though there are many who disagree that there could ever be a “safe

abortion”, this refers to whether the abortion is taking place in a clinical setting with

trained medical staff, or if it is happening as a

“backstreet abortion”, as it usually happens where

abortion is illegal or highly restricted. A strong

symbol of the Pro-‐Choice movement is the wire coat

hanger, symbolising the dangers of women trying to

procure abortions themselves, or illegally, when

abortion is restricted; thus risking their lives

resorting to inserting sharp objects in their uteri,

such as unfolded wire coat hangers, knitting needles

etc.

“Legal abortion performed under safe and sanitary conditions is generally safer

than pregnancy, but in countries where abortion is prohibited, or access is severely

limited, the negative consequences of unsafe and self-‐induced abortions include serious

complications such as sepsis, hemorrhage, genital and abdominal trauma, perforated

uterus, gangrene, secondary infertility, permanent disability, and death.” “According to

the World Health Organization (WHO), as many as 100,000 or more maternal deaths

occur each year as a result of complications of an unsafe, usually illegal abortion. Even in

the United States, some illegal abortions continue to be performed in cases where

women are without the resources to obtain a legal abortion. Although reliable incidence

data are lacking as to the number of illegal abortions performed worldwide, there clearly

11

is a strong demand for abortion, a demand that will probably always exist. As evidenced

by the estimated number of women who undergo illegal abortion, most women who are

determined to terminate a pregnancy will attempt to do so either by themselves or with

assistance.” (World Health Organisation [WHO] in Post, 2004, pp. 1-49, 6, 15) The claim

“Abortion harms women” needs to discriminate between unsafe, unregulated abortions and

their opposite. This argument of safety is the main thesis of the Consequentialist ethics

proponents, who argue that making abortion less accessible or banned even, will only increase

the number of maternal deaths and complications due to unsafe, unregulated abortions. WHO

statistics show that abortion-related deaths in Romania for example, increased sharply after

1966, when the government restricted abortion. The maternal death rate rose from 20 per

100,000 live births in 1965 to 150 per 100,000 in 1983. Abortion-related deaths decreased by

more than 50% in the year after abortion was again legalised in 1989. Statistics on abortion-

related mortality in the abortion-permissive United States, show that with safe, legal abortion,

the death rate is 0.6 per 100,000 procedures, making abortion statistcally as safe as a penicillin

injection. (Post, 2004, pp. 1-49, 15-16) Peter Singer writes that such consequentialist

arguments are not about the ethics of abortion, but rather the consequences of restrictive

abortion law, and though valid, is not a satisfactory argument to those who oppose abortion,

because they argue that it is the murder of innocent human life. (Singer, 1995, p. 143)

“Public-health concerns about the complications of unsafe abortion, coupled with the complex

issues relating to the reproductive and autonomy rights of women versus the rights of the

foetus, suggest the continuing importance that must be given by the field of bioethics to

abortion, particularly to the question of whether and by what means abortion should be made

available equally to all persons requesting it, regardless of national citizenship, ethnic or racial

identity, or economic status.” (Post, 2004)

Post Abortion Traumas

However closely tied are a high successful rate of abortions and safe medical practise, there is

still the fact that certain abortion procedures can have possible side effects on woman, which

can be harmful. Since medical practitioners are bound to “do no harm”, this raises many

ethical questions, particularly when abortion is resorted to as simply a birth control. There are

correlational studies that show relationships between abortion and a variety of ailments,

12

however often the mistake is done to assume that a correlation means that abortion is actually

the cause of the problem.

There is the notion of a possibility of a harmful effect on subsequent pregnancies. The

Encyclopedia of Bioethics states “Medical evidence has consistently shown that a woman

who has one properly performed induced abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy has the

same chance of a normal outcome of a subsequent pregnancy as a woman who has never had

an abortion. The evidence is less definitive for women who have had more than one induced

abortion or an abortion with complications, although there is no reason to believe that

additional abortion procedures, carried out by well-trained professionals, will have a long-term

adverse effect. Overall, in terms of medical risk, abortion procedures, particularly those

carried out in the first trimester of pregnancy, are among the safest of all surgical procedures.”

(Post, 2004, pp. 1-49, 4)

One correlation that is often quoted by the Pro-Life camp is the link between abortion

and Breast Cancer. It is proposed that Abortion increases the likelihood that women will

develop breast cancer. In early pregnancy, levels of oestrogen increase, leading to breast

growth in preparation for a woman to milk her child. When the process is interrupted by

abortion, immature cells are left in the woman's breasts, resulting in a greater potential risk of

breast cancer. (Russo & Russo, 1980, pp. 497-512) Yet again, cancer information resources

state that there is no research that provides a cause and effect relationship between the two.

(Beral, Bull, Doll, & al, 2004, pp. 1007-1016)

Another aspect of the harm to women by abortion, is the aspect of Mental Health

problems caused by abortion. Many even speak of a “syndrome” called “Post-‐abortion

trauma” “does not meet the American Psychiatric association’s definition of trauma.”

(Post, 2004, pp. 1-‐49, 4) The Pro-‐Life lobby cites some very famous studies and the

problem with studies in this area is that they suffer from “methodological problems,

including a lack of consensus about symptoms, inadequate study design, and lack of

adequate follow-‐up.” (Post, 2004, pp. 1-‐49, 4) One of these studies is by Fergusson et al

(Fergusson, Horwood, & Ridder, 2006), which when peer reviewed, including by the

APA, which concluded that “several design features limit conclusions that can be drawn

from this study.” (Major, 2008, p. 90) One obvious design flaw for example, women who

13

had an abortion, presumably because their pregnancy was unwanted for one reason or

other, were compared with ALL the women who did not have an abortion, whereas the

appropriate comparison group would have been all other women who unintended

pregnancy did not end in abortion.

Another famous study is by Coleman et al (2009) (Coleman, Coyle, Shuping, &

Rue, 2009) which established that abortion causes mental health problems. However it

is nowadays debunked as a flawed study. The APA pointed out many methodological

problems, such as inadequate comparison groups, but one of the most prominent

methodological flaws is that Coleman considered women with a lifetime condition of

mental health in her study, even those who had mental health problems BEFORE ever

having an abortion which made statistical analysis completely irrelevant, as pointed out

by (Steinberg & Finer, 2010).

One can easily conclude that this relationship between the abortion procedure

and mental health is not the strongest argument of the Pro-‐Life lobby. However many

argue that the jury’s still out on this notion. There are still many institutions, such as

“Rachel’s Vineyard Ministries” routinely offering help to women seeking it after having

gone through an abortion, as well as to their families. However this is still not an

argument that the medical procedure of abortion causes mental problems. Any of the

usual causes of grief or depression could be behind the experience, including the guilt

from resorting to what is considered to be a taboo by many, especially in the religious

worldview. Nevertheless “choosing to terminate a pregnancy is a serious decision that is

rarely made lightly. In addition to complete information about abortion procedure

options, counseling should be made available to women faced with a decision about an

unplanned pregnancy.” (Post, 2004)

Late Term Abortions

Late term abortion, which is also called partial-‐birth abortion (because it is an “almost

birth” because of the size of the foetus) is highly controversial. According to the

Encyclopedia of Bioethics, Abortionists usually prefer the foetus not being viable and

14

there are by far, less abortionists, who are ready to perform abortions after viability,

because essentially the physician would be terminating a foetus that can potentially

survive out of the uterus. There is another dilemma because late term abortions tend to

be more dangerous for the woman and can offer more complications. For the abortion to

be less dangerous, the procedure then has to be become more repugnantly inhumane

towards the foetus. The partial birth abortion would include the insertion of a canula

inside of the viable foetus’ head to exert a negative pressure internally and cause an

implosion of the head of the foetus so that it would more easily come out of the undilated

cervix, without inflicting more stress on the mother. This would explain why there is a

wider repudiation of this procedure in the medical field of abortion.

Late term abortions are also widely banned globally, except for countries like the

United States where abortion law is very liberal and where attempts to make it illegal

failed. Both President Clinton in 1996 and the Supreme court, denied the illegality of late

term abortion, on the grounds that the reproductive health of the woman is more

important and that since this reproductive health could not be guaranteed after viability,

should the ban pass, the bans were therefore not constitutionally upheld. (Annas, 1998,

pp. 279-‐283)

Late term abortions are yet another example of how individual procedures and

abortion methods provide a wider variety of ethical challenges and dilemmas for the

legislator and the physician.

15

The Personhood Debate

Why is the foetus not a person?

In the Abortion debate, no argument has been more profoundly rejected or protected by

the pro and con lobbies, than the argument of whether or not a foetus is a person. The

moral status of the foetus was given a hard blow in Roe v. Wade, without providing a

proper thesis for why the foetus is not a person and making abortion permissible. The

lack of personhood in the foetus denies the foetus of a right to life and it makes abortion

morally justifiable under almost any circumstance. As mentioned earlier, viability is

sometimes used as a barrier to stop abortions from happening after a certain age, as was

the notion of quickening used. Quickening is when the foetus starts manifesting motility

while inside the uterus. But the question rises, should movement constitute

personhood? Would therefore a paralysed person lose personhood with this logic?

There are other markers which are referred to, such as the ability of the foetus to feel

pain. Foetuses are incapable of feeling pain when an abortion is performed according to

Stuart W. G. Derbyshire, PhD, Senior Lecturer at the University of Birmingham (England).

"Not only has the biological development not yet occurred to support pain experience,

but the environment after birth, so necessary to the development of pain experience, is

also yet to occur." (Stuart, 2006) So if a person has a nervous disorder or is under

anaesthesia, is the person no longer a person? There are even arguments for

personhood like for instance, that a “person is one that can participate in moral

obligations and responsibilities through a capacity of reasoning and consciousness.”

(Warren, 1973) However this logic would also deny personhood to a born toddler up to

even 3 years of age and justify infanticide.

There are 2 major paradigms of how the personhood of the foetus is viewed. The

first one is the Developmental View, which is in admission that there are no clear lines to

pick out which foetus is a person and which is not. Foetal life becomes increasingly

important as gestation progresses but it is difficult to pinpoint when exactly does it

become a person. This offers little guidelines to how legislations should be codified;

however this seems to be the reigning paradigm in law worldwide. The potentiality view

however, advances that conception or fertilisation as the beginning of personhood

16

because it is the fertilised ovum, not its constituent gametes, that is considered to have

the potential to develop into a human being with full moral status. In this case there is

another detail in semantics that opens debate between the pro and con lobbies. The

potentiality view is criticized because even a gamete has the potential to become a

human person and that this potential is therefore not an argument in favour of foetal

personhood, and that a “potential person” is not a person. Thomson says, “a newly

fertilized ovum, a newly implanted clump of cells, is no more a person than an acorn is an

oak tree.” (Thomson, A Defense of Abortion, 1971, pp. 595-‐604)

The pro-‐life’s response to this is the ontological view of the person, where

persons are by definition ends-‐in-‐themselves, bearers of rights, entitled to treatment

with dignity and not to be used for somebody else’s purposes. This is above

psychological and physiological traits. The physiological differences between a zygote

and a newborn baby are not seen as an argument to treat the two differently and rather

than the zygote (or fertilized egg) is seen as a potential person, it is seen as a “person

with potential.”

Neurological reasons?

Regarding the developmental view, an interesting perspective to consider is the field of

Evolutionary Psychology. Steven Pinker, in his article on the New York Times titled

“Why they kill their Newborns”, points out the fact that both publicly and legally, there is

an increased leniency to the murder or attempted murder, the younger the child is. In

fact he distinguishes between neonaticide and infanticide; he is quoted saying:

“Barbara Kirwin, a forensic psychologist, reports that in nearly 300

cases of women charged with neonaticide in the United States and

Britain, no woman spent more than a night in jail. In Europe, the laws of

several countries prescribed less-‐severe penalties for neonaticide than

for adult homicides. The fascination with the Grossberg-‐Peterson case

comes from the unusual threat of the death penalty. Even those in favor

of capital punishment might shudder at the thought of two reportedly

nice kids being strapped to gurneys and put to death. But our

17

compassion hinges on the child, not just on the mother. Killers of older

children, no matter how desperate, evoke little mercy. Susan Smith, the

South Carolina woman who sent her two sons, 14 months and 3 years

old, to watery deaths, is in jail, unmourned, serving a life sentence. The

leniency shown to neonaticidal mothers forces us to think the

unthinkable and ask if we, like many societies and like the mothers

themselves, are not completely sure whether a neonate is a full person.

It seems obvious that we need a clear boundary to confer personhood

on a human being and grant it a right to life. Otherwise, we approach a

slippery slope that ends in the disposal of inconvenient people or in

grotesque deliberations on the value of individual lives. But the endless

abortion debate shows how hard it is to locate the boundary.” (Pinker,

1997)

Pinker makes a valid point where it seems that the repugnance towards the act of

intending harm towards a child younger than a toddler diminishes gradually, as if

neonates by default are not full persons. Examples in Malta also illustrate this argument.

The case where a woman abandoned her neonate in a shoebox was termed, even by the

public media, as an “unfortunate, desperate mother”, rather than a case of an attempted

murder. Even abortion in what is called “Pro-‐Life Malta”, is not legally repudiated as

murder in the first degree. Article 241 of the Maltese criminal code states: “Whosoever

by any food, drink, medicine or by violence or by any other means whatsoever shall

cause the miscarriage of any woman with child, whether the woman be consenting or

not, shall, on conviction, be liable to imprisonment for a term for 18 months to 3 years”,

which is a small fraction of the penalty of murder of an adult person. So I would

disagree that Maltese law grants full personhood to the foetus.

The status, or rather lack thereof, of the neonate allowed for the scale balance to

shift further to the mother’s concerns, rather than the actual act of abandonment of a

neonate. Could it be that through evolution, there are individuals who do not develop an

immediate attachment to neonates or unborn perhaps as a protective remedy against

any problems that might ensue? A simple example in nature is a deer having to abandon

its slow-‐to-‐walk offspring and allow the lions to feast on it, so that it may save its own

18

life; the argument of the lesser evil. Could this psychological detachment, be an

inherited protection against this kind of trauma? Anthropologists studying hunter-‐

gatherer societies, whose way of life makes the birth of newborns precarious, noticed

that neonate abandonment was seen as an unavoidable tragedy. “Many cultural

practices are designed to distance people’s emotions from a newborn until its survival

seems probable.” (Pinker, 1997) This argument could easily be further applied to the

child younger than the neonate; the unborn. Could the denial of personhood be that? The

desensitizing of women from their children?

This unfortunate debate has unhinged many things, where we live in a society

where animal welfare activists march in streets to protect endangered animals, who are

busy resorting to reproductive technologies to boost the populations of endangered

animals and yet there is no problem at all to terminate the reproductive process of a

human being, and stopping the gestational development of a member of our species,

without dwelling too much about it. There is a need to dwell a lot about this but the

answers cannot be found in the sophistry of personhood or the lack thereof, but rather in

greater understanding of ourselves, our societies and our actions. There is no apparent

reason to deny any living organism a moral status, whether born or unborn, except to

justify actions done to it, such as its manipulation or termination. The world saw what

happened when personhood was denied to a whole race of people in World War 2 and it

seems that not enough lessons have been learnt.

19

Feminism, Rights and Reason

Beyond the rhetoric of Personhood

As mentioned in a previous section, the American feminist movement were

largely pro life (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2012), including the founder of

Planned Parenthood, albeit being in favour of eugenics. The feminist case can therefore

be argued from both sides of the issue. The women’s rights arguments for abortion

involve not only placing an appropriate value on the lives and freedom of women but

also accepting that it may sometimes be permissible to sacrifice the life of a foetus. On

the other hand, many of the women’s right arguments against abortion claim that

abortion does not improve women’s overall position in society, or that abortion provides

an excuse not to solver or other problems faced by pregnant women. Once again, it is

seen how the issue of abortion brings also division within a movement and it would be a

crass statement to assume that feminism is an automatic implication in favour or against

the issue. Betsy Hartmann is quoted “Denying women the right to abortion makes

women bear all the hardship and blame for unwanted pregnancies, ignoring the fact that

men bear responsibility too, and that many unwanted pregnancies result from unwanted

intercourse.” Justice Harry A. Blackmun, speaking of the reaffirmation of Roe v. Wade: “I

think it's a step that had to be taken as we go down the road toward the full

emancipation of women.” (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2012)

Thomson makes a very compelling argument in her defence of abortion. Firstly

she argues on feminist grounds that abortion affects women disproportionately when

compared to men, because it is women who get pregnant and likewise, the availability of

abortion affects women directly and not the male gender. “a great deal turns for women

on whether abortion is or is not available. If abortion rights are denied, then a constraint

is imposed on women's freedom to act in a way that is of great importance to them, both

for its own sake and for the sake of their achievement of equality; and if the constraint is

imposed on the ground that the foetus has a right to life from the moment of conception,

then it is imposed on a ground that neither reason nor the rest of morality requires

women to accept, or even to give any weight at all. (Thomson, Abortion, 1995) However

Thomson is more widely known for her Violinist thought experiment. Thomson notes

20

that much of the inadequate debate on abortion was getting lost within the issue of

whether the fetus is a person or a mass of tissue. She then grants the foetus moral

personhood since conception for her argument. Then she asks a person to consider the

ethics of a scenario where they wake to find themselves in a hospital serving as life

support to a famous violinist. The person is asked to consider that they were not

consulted prior to this arrangement, but that if they detach from the violinist he will die.

Thomson wrote, "If you stay in the hospital bed, connected to the violinist, he will be

totally cured in nine months. You are unlikely to suffer harm. No one else can save him.

Do you have an obligation to stay connected?" (Thomson, A Defense of Abortion, 1971)

This model has brought a lot of criticism, ironically also from the feminist lobby,

because it limits itself to justifying abortion only in the case of an unjust, unwanted

pregnancy, such as in the case of rape; where simple empathy with the mother victim

outweighs the right to life of the dependent foetus (the violinist). In fact all this notion is

based on the rights theoretical stance, that the right to life is the right not to be killed

unjustly and that should enough argument is found in favour to make one’s death just,

then the denial of life is permissible. What could be positive about this approach is that

it’s an attempt to go beyond the personhood argument, which has reached a complete

stalemate. The same, and opposite to the pro-‐argument from Thomson, is Marquis’

rationalization. Marquis does away with the argument of personhood (which he calls a

rhetorical onslaught) and claims that his beliefs are not “a symptom of irrational

religious dogma.” His thesis is supported by Kant’s Categorical Imperative and states

that once conception takes place there is an “identifiable subject” that would have its

future denied, should the pregnancy be terminated. The same way we feel more sorry

when someone dies young because s/he is deprived of a future, the same argument

applies to the foetus. (Marquis, 1989, pp. 183-‐202)

Pro life feminists on the other hand argue, as stated earlier, that Abortion is

inconsistent with the goals and ideals of Feminism. Women are treated unfairly by being

given a non-‐choice. Abortion offers a way out of what really is a social problem, instead

of addressing the problem itself to truly emancipate the status of women in Society.

Sidney Callahan argues that abortion does not allow feminists to reach their goals.

(Callahan, 1986)

21

Bottom line, the idea of Women’s rights clashing against Foetus’ rights to life, has

created a legal antagonism between two entities that have no quarrel between them.

Perhaps, like personhood, Rights approaches are shaky, particularly with justifying the

foetal right to life, when personhood is debatable. Perhaps the only solid argument to

denying the foetal right to life is Thomson’s argument, but in no way does it justify a

liberal abortion law, where abortion can be prescribed as a simple method of birth

control.

Father’s Rights

Philosopher George W. Harris is quoted “There are circumstances under which a

woman’s decision to have an abortion would be morally wrong because it would do

harm to the father.”

Likewise, Armin A. Brott states “A woman can legally deprive a man of his right to

become a parent or force him to become one against his will.” In 2002, a Chinese law

amendment put a man’s right to have a child on an equal footing with the right of his wife

and a man has sued his wife for infringing that right by having an abortion. In the USA, it

is consistently decided that spousal objection cannot veto a woman’s right to abortion. A

woman does not have to notify the father if she wants to procure an abortion. In the UK,

in 1987 and 2001, men attempted to prevent former partners having abortions and

failed.

Most legal systems don’t allow a father to escape the responsibility of fatherhood.

But on the other hand. a man cannot deny child support on the argument that he wanted

his partner to have an abortion and she refused. So it is clear that the feminist view of

disproportionate effect of pregnancy and abortion on women, is not allowing much

rights to the father in such legal jurisdictions. (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2012)

22

Consistency

Some writers argue that it is inconsistent to support abortion if you oppose capital

punishment, weapons of mass destruction, and so on. Respect for the dignity of life, they

say, should apply to all life -‐ the right to life can't be divided up, but should be presented

as 'a consistent ethic of life.'

Mary Meehan (1980) writes “We are moved by what pro-‐life feminists call the

"consistency thing" -‐ the belief that respect for human life demands opposition to

abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, and war...It is out of character for the left to

neglect the weak and helpless. The traditional mark of the left has been its protection of

the underdog, the weak and the poor. The unborn child is the most helpless form of

humanity, even more in need of protection than the poor tenant farmer or the mental

patient. The basic instinct of the left is to aid those who cannot aid themselves. And that

instinct is absolutely sound. It's what keeps the human proposition going.”

Similarly pro-‐life movements have also been accused of inconsistencies,

particularly with being silent on other issues, such as capital punishment, apart from the

moral status of the foetus.

23

Abortion and Religion

Most major religions bolster the idea of the sanctity of life, where life being a gift from a

supreme being cannot be tampered with or taken away. Religions are therefore

generally pro-‐life, and there probably is no movement more vociferous against abortion,

that the Roman Apostolic Catholic Church. In the Catholic Evangelium Vitae, one finds

“All human beings, from their mother’s womb, belong to God who searches them and

knows them, who forms them and knits them together with his own hands, who gazes on

them when they are tiny shapeless embryos and already sees in them the adults of

tomorrow..." (Evangelium Vitae #61)

The Catholic Church argues vehemently against abortion, even as a lesser evil or

in the case of rape or in the case of danger of the mother’s life. Under the doctrine of

double effect, an “indirect” abortion can be procured, i.e. if a mother’s life is in danger

and in need of treatment, resulting in the side effect of the loss of the foetus, that is

morally permissible, however the good treatment cannot be procured by a direct

abortion, since the foetus is worthy of an inviolable human right and dignity.

A major religious consequence in the Catholic Church for someone procuring an

abortion or in formal cooperation in the procurement of one, is excommunication from

the Church for the perpetrators, according to Canon law. Abortion is therefore a major

issue for members of the Catholic Church, particularly with spiritual deterrents such as

these.

Not all Christian denominations agree with the Catholic Church, for example

Church of England would allow abortion for self-‐defence, as a lesser evil, yet it scorns the

high instance of abortion in the UK since the 1967 UK Abortion act.

Islam is generally against abortion (considered to be Haram) “Whosoever has

spared the life of a soul, it is as though he has spared the life of all people. Whosoever has

killed a soul, it is as though he has murdered all of mankind.” Qur’an 5:32 However Islam

does not have a centralised Magisterium of doctrine. The way the Qur’an is written (in

Arabic) is open to interpretation. There are schisms and different interpretations of the

24

Qur’an depending on denomination and on the individual scholar. Some scholars for

instance, justify abortion in the case of the lesser of two evils; The prophet said: “When

two forbidden things come together, then the lesser will be sacrificed for the greater.”

Muslim women raped by non-‐believers (Kuffar) will be subject to social ostracism

with the risk of not finding a husband. The illegitimate child (walad zina) or “child of

lust” or “bastard” because such a child in this context, is considered to be the lowest

member of society. In the ex-‐Yugoslavian Civil War, Fatwas were issued to allow

Bosnian women that were raped by Serb (Christian) men to resort to abortion as soon as

possible or within 40 days. (Fatwas were issued by Sheikh Bin Baz of Saudi Arabia and

Sheikh Tantawi, who was the grand Mufti of Egypt.) Ikrima Sabri, the Mufti of Palestinian

Authority also issued a Fatwa in 1999 for these women to use abortive pills in order “not

to strengthen the Serbs in Kosovo.” (Atigetchi, 2007)

So it can be argued that abortion poses a great challenge to religions and different

theologies. It brings further disagreements in the religious or theistic worldview and

could potentially put believers in a dilemma. Should one follow or not follow the tenets

of the beliefs he or she follows? And which beliefs are right? What is certain is that the

Pro-‐Life arguments are not, as many misconceptions proclaim, strictly religious in origin.

Religious deontology further adds to the debate, but taking the whole sphere of religions,

particularly the Abrahamic religions, they both add to the Pro-‐life, and as seen in

religions other than the Catholic Church, offer considerations in favour of the Pro-‐choice

lobby as well.

25

The Shaping of Society

Disability issues

Abortion has a profound effect on the way we see our society and the way we decide on

the foundations of our society. For instance, Human Rights have secured to rights of

every person, giving dignity and respect even to persons with disabilities where today

we strive to build inclusive societies, where persons with disability do not need to feel

like outcasts or “lesser.” The values of inclusion are enshrined in the rights we cherish

today.

Abortion of people with disability is argued that it gives couples the option to

choose not to birth babies with severe and life-‐threatening medical conditions. Fragile X

syndrome, the most common genetic form of mental retardation, affects about 1 in 4,000

males and 1 in 8,000 females. One in 800 babies have Down Syndrome, and one in 3,500

babies are born with Cystic Fibrosis. It is not right to sentence a child to life with an acute

handicap. (March Of Dimes, 2010)

Yet it could be argued that legislating abortion in the case of a child being

diagnosed as disabled, is inconsistent with this view of inclusion. Section 1(1)d of the

UK's 1967 Abortion Act (still enforced till this day) allowed termination of a pregnancy

at any time if there was a significant risk of the baby being born seriously disabled.

Under other circumstances abortion has to take place during the first 6 months of the

pregnancy.

The Disability Rights Commission reacts that “the Section is offensive to many

people; it reinforces negative stereotypes of disability and there is substantial support

for the view that to permit terminations at any point during a pregnancy on the ground

of risk of disability, while time limits apply to other grounds set out in the Abortion Act,

is incompatible with valuing disability and non-‐disability equally.” Abortion of disabled

foetuses is an implication that the lives of persons with disability are less worthwhile.

26

Most people with disabilities say that they would much rather be alive. Allowing

abortion on the grounds of disability, preempts the choice of the individual concerned.

(British Broadcasting Corporation, 2012)

Demographics

Abortion is a sure population control. Considering that over 40 Million abortions

occur worldwide every year, it is a means of controlling an exploding population that is

also draining more and more natural resources, making the human population

unsustainable. The antinatalist worldview is particularly prescriptive of abortion as a

means of birth control for such environmental purposes. Not only is a growing

population an ecological burden, but pro-‐choice arguments also go on to say that

abortion reduces the rate of crime. “Abortion lowers crime. Some estimates claim that

legalised abortion accounted for as much as 50% of the drop in murder, property crime,

and violent crime between 1973 and 2001. Teenage girls, unmarried women, and poor

women are more likely to have unintended pregnancies. Unwanted babies are often

raised poor, increasing their chances of leading criminal lives in adulthood.” (Donohue &

Levitt, 2001) However, Economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston found coding

errors in Levitt’s research. In response to their revelation, Levitt apologised and said on

Nov. 28, 2005 that he was "personally embarrassed" about his errors. (Foote & Goetz,

2008)

However, dwindling populations in countries where abortion was legalised

liberally, are in an effort to restrict the access to abortion to help increase fertility and

the live birth rate. For example in Russia, there is the world’s highest rate of abortion -‐In

2003, they had 13 terminations for every 10 births. Now it went down to 73

terminations for every 100 births in 2009. Russia’s population is still in severe decline,

even if under the former Putin legislature and in Medvedev’s there have been a lot of

fertility incentives for mothers and working mothers. The Russian Orthodox church and

Demographic problems have pushed Dmitri Medvedev and the current re-‐elected Putin

to bring new changes to Abortion Law. Medvedev signed other restrictions which

include requiring abortion providers to devote 10% of advertising costs to describing

27

the dangers of abortion to a woman's health and make it illegal to describe abortion as a

safe medical procedure. Putin in February 2012, stopped all funding of late term

abortions by National Healthcare for “social” reasons. Previously, Russians could receive

government-‐funded abortions after the first twelve weeks of pregnancy in cases of rape,

when a woman had been deprived of parental rights by a court, imprisonment of the

woman, or death or disability of her husband. The only “social” condition that now

remains is rape, according to Russian media sources. Women may also still obtain late-‐

term abortions if they suffer from a life-‐threatening illness during the pregnancy.

Although the rule applies only to government-‐provided abortions, it represents another

step towards restrictions on abortion that have long been sought by the current

government. (Lifesitenews.com, 2012)

Another abortive issue that is causing long-‐term harm in Demographics is sex

selective abortion. Taiwan’s abortion law stipulates that a woman can undergo an

induced abortion “if the pregnancy adversely affects the psychological or physical health

of the woman or her family life.” However, sex-‐selective abortion is illegal. A report from

Taiwanese health authorities says that a crackdown on illegal sex-‐selective abortions

prevented the deaths of nearly 1,000 female unborn babies in 2011. Department of

Health figures showed Taiwan’s gender ratio at birth from 2004 to 2010 was between

109 and 112 males for every 100 females, compared to a natural ratio of about 106

males to 100 females. The government agency estimated that this has resulted in up to

3,000 missing female babies each year. (Lifesitenews.com, 2012) For economic and

cultural reasons, late term abortions after the diagnosis of the foetus’ sex with an

ultrasound scan, were being done. This raises questions on the role of ultrasound scans

in pregnancy; a tool that is beneficial for foetology can have a discriminatory role against

women.

28

Conclusion

The debate of abortion is still rampant and not only in the world of Bioethics, but as this

assignment has proven, it is an issue that penetrates various strata of society. With

regards to who is right or wrong, the jury is still out and it is unsure whether any

answers will be given any time soon; if answers will be given at all. There could be a

possibility of stances towards abortion pendulating from one side to the other across

History. There is however also a possibility that a closure to the abortion debate can be

found. There was a time when slavery was widely accepted, until it became debatable

until it became abolished globally. There could be a time when such a definite

conclusion can be found about abortion, however it is possible that it goes both ways;

one can either conclude that the termination of pregnancies and foetal development is as

inhumane as slavery, if not more, or conclude that the denial of reproductive rights to

women, is tantamount to the same horror. Perhaps, history will one day reveal our

destiny in this regard.

What is sure is that in the abortion debate, it is important that a spade is called a

spade rather than dwelling on very sophist rhetoric. If we ever hope to attain the closure

that this overdue debate so needs, we need to cast off first the arguments that have

reached a complete stalemate and to stop dwelling on myths coming from both the pro

and con lobbies of abortion and start question what can be done to both emancipate

women and at the same time avoid that which is morally repudiating and potentially

harmful. In the words of Daniel Dennett “We must cast off the myths that make these

old-‐fashioned solutions seem inevitable. We need to grow up, in other words.”

29

Bibliography

Warren, M. A. (1973). On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion. (B. Steinbock, & J. D. Arras, Eds.) Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine . Abort73.com. (2010, September 3). Abortion and the Hippocratic Oath. Retrieved March 2012 from Abort73.com: http://www.abort73.com/abortion/abortion_and_the_hippocratic_oath/ all.org. (1999). American Bioethics Advisory Commision -‐ Eugenics. Retrieved March 2012 from American Life League -‐ American Bioethics Advisory commission: http://www.all.org/abac/eugen02.htm Annas, G. J. (1998). Partial Birth Abortion, Congress, and the Constitution. New England Journal of Medicine , 339 (4), 279-‐283. Atigetchi, D. (2007). Islamic Bioethics: Problems and Perspectives. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Beral, V., Bull, D., Doll, R., & al, e. (2004). Breast Cancer and Abortion: Collaborative reanalysis of data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 83,000 women with breast cancer from 16 countries. Lancet , 363, 1007-‐1016. British Broadcasting Corporation. (2012). Ethics Guide -‐ Abortion -‐ Women's Rights. Retrieved March 2012 from BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/mother/introduction.shtml British Broadcasting Corporation. (2012). Ethics Guide -‐ Abortion -‐ Early Feminists. Retrieved March 2012 from BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/mother/early.shtml British Broadcasting Corporation. (2012). Ethics Guide -‐ Abortion -‐ The Rights of the Father. Retrieved March 2012 from BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/legal/fathers.shtml Callahan, S. (1986). A Case for Pro-‐Life Feminism. In B. Steinbock, & J. D. Arras (Eds.), Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine (5 ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company. Ciappara, F. (1988). Marriage in Malta in the Late Eighteenth Century (1750-‐1800). Malta: Associated News.

30

Coleman, P. K., Coyle, C. T., Shuping, M., & Rue, V. M. (2009). Induced abortion and anxiety, mood and substance abuse disorders: Isolating the effects of abortion in the national comorbidity survey. Journal of Psychiatric Research , 43 (8), 770-‐776. Coppens, C. (1907). Abortion. In C. Coppens, The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Donohue, J. J., & Levitt, S. D. (2001, May). The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime. Quarterly Journal of Economics . Fergusson, D., Horwood, L., & Ridder, E. (2006). Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 47 (1), 16-‐24. Foote, C. L., & Goetz, C. F. (2008, February). The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime: Comment. Quarterly Journal of Economics . Hamalek, L. (2003). Prenatal Consultation at the Limits of Viability. NeoReviews , 4 (6), 153-‐156. Klotz, J. W. (1973). A Historical Summary of Abortion from Antiquity through Legalization. In A Christian view of abortion. St. Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House. Lefkowitz, M. R., & Fant, M. R. (1992). Intercourse, Conception and Pregnancy. In Women's Life in Greece & Rome: A source book in translation (p. 341). Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Lifesitenews.com. (2012, February). Retrieved March 2012 from Lifesitenews.com: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ Nathanson, B. (Director). (1984). The Silent Scream [Motion Picture]. USA: American Portrait Films. Major, B. e. (2008). Report of the APA Task Force on Mental Health and Abortion. Washington D.C: American Psychological Association. March Of Dimes. (2010). Retrieved March 2012 from March Of Dimes 2010: http://www.marchforbabies.org/ Marquis, D. (1989). Why Abortion is Immoral. Journal of Philosophy , 86, 183-‐202. McCormick, R. A. (1989). Theology and Bioethics. The Hastings Center Report , 19 (2), 5-‐10.

31

PBS.ORG Broadcast. (2006, January 19). Frontline -‐ The Last Abortion Clinic. Retrieved March 2012 from PBS: www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/clinic/wars/cases.html Pinker, S. (1997, November 2). Why They Kill Their Newborns. New York Times . Post, S. G. (Ed.). (2004). Encylopedia of Bioethics -‐ Abortion (3rd ed., Vol. 1). New York: Macmillan Reference. Potts, M., & Campbell, M. (2009, May). History of Contraception. Retrieved March 2012 from The Global Library of Women's Medicine: http://www.glowm.com prolifewisconsin.org. (2012). Personhood: The Pro-‐Life Movement's Ultimate Goal. Retrieved March 2012 from Pro-‐Life Wisconsin: http://www.prolifewisconsin.org Sanger, M. (1920). Women and the New Race. New York: Truth Publishing. Sanger, M. (1938). Margaret Sanger, An Autobiography. New York: W. W. Norton. Singer, P. (1995). Practical Ethics. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. Stuart, W. G. (2006, April 29). Can Fetuses feel Pain? British Medical Journal . Steinberg, J. R., & Finer, L. B. (2010). Examining the association of abortion history and current mental health: A reanalysis of the National Comorbidity Survey using a common-‐risk-‐factors model. Social Science and Medicine , 72 (1), 77-‐82. Russo, J., & Russo, I. (1980). Susceptibility of the mammary gland to carcinogenesis. II. Pregnancy interruption as a risk factor in tumor incidence. The American Journal of Pathology , 100 (2), 497-‐512. Riddle, J. M. (1992). Contraception and Abortion from the Ancient World to the Renaissance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Robinson, B. A. (2010, October 17). Roman Catholicism and Abortion Access. Retrieved March 2012 from Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance: http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_hist.htm Thomson, J. J. (1971). A Defense of Abortion. In B. Steinbock, & J. D. Arras (Eds.), Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine (5 ed., pp. 595-‐604). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing company. Thomson, J. J. (1995, Summer). Abortion. Boston Review .

32

End

MRT5120 Abortion - Roger Tirazona

Documents

Transcript of MRT5120 Abortion - Roger Tirazona