write a 950-1000 words paper on abortion

User Generated

ynhennnnnn

Writing

Description

Be sure to address those points from the readings and lectures that are most important to your argument, but also be sure to make some original contribution to the discussion. While it is fine to draw on the materials from the lessons, be sure to present the material in your own way and in your own words. Use all of the knowledge you have gained thus far in the course about analyzing, evaluating and critiquing arguments. You must also follow the assignment as it is described here. Failure to do so will lower your grade. See the same “writing guidelines” sheet for details about how the papers will be graded.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

As a brief guide, the following are included in a good critical paper: It documents (footnotes) material drawn from sources (even your textbook), placing quotations in quotes. It documents not only direct quotations, but ideas and information. If you have more than three words in a row drawn directly from a document, and you do not footnote it and put it in quotes (whether intentional or unintentional), you are plagiarizing. If you paraphrase another author’s ideas from a document and do not cite your source (whether intentional or unintentional), you are plagiarizing. For plagiarism you will receive an F on the paper or even fail the course. (See the paper topics for an example of parenthetical citation. For guides on how to cite properly, use any writing style guide, e.g. MLA, or visit the Writing Center on campus. Either parenthetical citations or footnote citations are acceptable.) It clearly states what it is trying to prove (i.e. the main thesis or conclusion) and does what the assignment sheet says is required. It offers arguments for what it says (i.e. some reasons or evidence for claims, not just mere assertions). It states at least the most obvious argument against what it is trying to say, and answers them (i.e. at least one significant objection to what it is trying to prove and a reply to this objection). It contains no “fluff”---every paragraph is relevant, every sentence says something new, or clarifies something, and is needed. (For further guidelines, please consult the grading guidelines below.) ON4 by Mary Anne Warren I INTRODUCTION Do women have the right to abort unwanted pregnancies? Or is the state entitled (or perhaps ethically required) to prohibit deliberate abortion? Should some abortions be permitted and others not? Does the proper legal status of abortion follow directly from its moral status? Or should abortion be legal, baptize the standing of ty is worse Ork is better done loves drage, that having even if it is sometimes or always morally wrong? Such questions have aroused intense debate during the past two dec- ades. Interestingly enough, in most of the industrialized world abortion was not a criminal offence until a series of anti-abortion laws were passed during the second half of the nineteenth century. At that time, proponents of the prohibition of abortion generally stressed the medical dangers of abortion. It was also sometimes argued that fetuses are human beings from conception onward, and that deliberate abortion is therefore a form of homicide. Now that improved techniques have made properly performed abortions much safer than childbirth, the medical argument has lost what- ever force it may once have had. Consequently, the focus of anti-abortion arguments has shifted from the physical safety of women to the moral value of fetal life. Advocates of women's right to choose abortion have responded to the anti-abortion argument in several ways. I shall examine three lines of argu- ment for the pro-choice view: (1) that abortion should be permitted, because the prohibition of abortion leads to highly undesirable consequences; (2) that women have a moral right to choose abortion; and (3) that fetuses are not yet persons and thus do not yet have a substantial right to life. fear only echnology Way in the burden of ing forced through II CONSEQUENTIALIST ARGUMENTS FOR ABORTION a trauma women hild at its ide one's those for ld not be If actions are to be morally evaluated by their consequences, then a strong case can be made that the prohibition of abortion is wrong. Throughout history women have paid a terrible price for the absence of safe and legal contraception and abortion. Forced to bear many children, at excessively short intervals, they were often physically debilitated and died young - a common fate in most pre-twentieth-century societies and much of the Third World today. Involuntary childbearing aggravates poverty, increases infant and child death rates, and places severe strains upon the resources of fami- (84) lions of lies and states. 15 it has member ferilor Improved methods of contraception have somewhat alleviated these prob- lems. Yet no form of contraception is 100 per cent effective. Moreover, many Women lack access to contraception, e.g. because they cannot afford it, or it is unavailable where they live, or unavailable to minors without parental per- mission. In most of the world, paid work has become an economic necessity 3 98 for many women, married or single. Women who must earn have an acute need to control their fertility. Without that control, they often find it impossi- ble to obtain the education necessary for any but the most marginal employ- labour. This is as true in socialist as in capitalist economies, since in both ment, or impossible to combine the responsibilities of childrearing and paid economic systems women must contend with the double responsibility of paid and domestic work. because many people cannot afford to have (and properly raise) any chiſ dren, or as many children as they would like; and others are Contraception and abortion do not guarantee reproductive autonomy, involuntarily infertile. However, both contraception and abortion are essential if women are to have the modest degree of reproductive autonomy which is possible in the world as it is presently constructed. In the long run, access to abortion is essential for the health and sur- vival not just of individual women and families, but also that of the larger social and biological systems on which all our lives depend. Given the inadequacy of present methods of contraception and the lack of universal access to contraception, the avoidance of rapid population growth gener- ally requires some use of abortion. Unless population growth rates are reduced in those impoverished societies where they remain high, malnu- trition and starvation will become even more widespread than at present. There might still be enough food to feed all the people of the world, if only it were more equitably distributed. However, this cannot remain true indefinitely. Soil erosion and climatic changes brought about by the destruction of forests and the burning of fossil fuels threaten to reduce the earth's capacity for food production - perhaps drastically — within the next generation. Yet opponents of abortion deny that abortion is necessary for the avoid- ance of such undesirable consequences. Some pregnancies are the result of rape or involuntary incest, but most result from apparently voluntary sexual behaviour. Thus, anti-abortionists often claim that women who seek abortions are 'refusing to take responsibility for their own actions'. In their view, women ought to avoid heterosexual intercourse unless they reasonable one? are prepared to complete any resulting pregnancy. But is this demand a Heterosexual intercourse is not biologically necessary for women's — Of men's - individual survival or physical health. On the contrary, women who are celibate or homosexual are less vulnerable to cervical cancer, AIDS, and other sexually transmitted diseases. Nor is it obvious that sex is nec essary for the psychological health of either women or men, although the contrary belief is widespread. It is, however, something that many women find intensely pleasurable - a fact which is morally significant on most con- sequentialist theories. Furthermore, it is part of the form of life which the majority of women everywhere appear to prefer. In some places, lesbian 399 usually needs. But for most heterosexual women, the choice of permanent celibacy is very difficult. In much of the world, it is very difficult for single women to support themselves (let alone support a family); and sexual intercourse is one of the 'duties' of married women. In short, permanent celibacy is not a reasonable option to impose upon most women. And since all women are potentially vulnerable to rape, even those who are homosexual or celibate may face unwanted pregnan- available to all women, the consequentialist arguments for abortion will cies. Hence, until there is a fully reliable and safe form of contraception, remain strong. But these arguments will not persuade those who reject consequentialist moral theories. If abortion is inherently wrong, as many believe, then it cannot be justified as a means of avoiding undesirable con- sequences. Thus, we must also consider whether women have a moral right to seek abortion. IN ABORTION AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS rates are gh, malnu at present. world, if ot remain out by the to reduce within he avoid the result Not all moral philosophers believe that there are such things as moral rights. Thus, it is important to say a bit here about what moral rights are; in section (viii) I will say more about why they are important. ... Rights are not mysterious entities that we discover in nature; they are not, in fact, enti- ties at all. To say that people have a right to life is to say, roughly, that they should never deliberately be killed or deprived of the necessities of life, un- less the only alternative is some much greater evil. Rights are not absolute, but neither are they to be overridden for just any apparently greater good. For instance, one may kill in self-defence when there is no other way to pro- tect oneself from death or serious harm unjustly inflicted; but one may not kill another person merely because others may gain a great deal from the victim's death. Basic moral rights are those which all persons have, in contrast to those rights which depend upon particular circumstances, e.g. promises or legal contracts. The basic moral rights of persons are usually held to include the rights to life, liberty, self-determination, and freedom from the infliction of bodily harm. The prohibition of abortion appears to infringe upon all of these basic rights. Women's lives are endangered in at least two ways. Where abortion is illegal, women often seek unsafe illegal abortions; the World Health Organization estimates that over 200,000 women die from this cause oluntary nen who actions: less they emanda n's-Or women DADES 1971 each year. Many others die from involuntary childbirth, when abortion is or when they are pressured not to use it. Of course, voluntary unavailable, childbirth also involves some risk of death; but in the absence of coercion, there is no violation of the woman's right to life. The denial of abortion also infringes upon women's rights to liberty, self- determination, and physical integrity. To be forced to bear a child is not just 400 an 'inconvenience', as opponents of abortion often claim. To carry a preg. be sure, many women enjoy (much of) their pregnancies; but for those who remain pregnant against their will the experience is apt to be thoroughly miserable. And involuntary pregnancy and childbirth are only the begin- ning of the hardships caused by the denial of abortion. The woman must either keep the child or surrender it for adoption. To keep the child make it impossible to continue her chosen life work, or to meet her other family obligations. To surrender the child means that she must live with the unhappy knowledge that she has a daughter or son for whom she cannot care, often cannot even know to be alive and well. Studies of women who have surrendered infants for adoption show that, for most, the separation from their child is a great and lasting grief. Even if we accept the view that fetuses have a right to life, it is difficult to justify the imposition of such hardships upon unwilling individuals for the sake of fetal lives. As Judith Thomson pointed out in her much-discussed 1971 article, 'A defense of abortion', there is no other case in which the law requires individuals (who have been convicted of no crime) to sacrifice liberty, self-determination, and bodily integrity in order to preserve the lives of others. Perhaps one analogy to involuntary childbirth is military con- scription. However, that comparison can lend only moderate support to the anti-abortion position, since the justifiability of compulsory military service is itself debatable. In popular rhetoric, especially in the United States, the abortion issue is often seen as purely and simply one of 'women's right to control their bod- ies'. If women have the moral right to abort unwanted pregnancies, then the law should not prohibit abortion. But the arguments for this right do not entirely solve the moral issue of abortion. For it is one thing to have a right, and another to be morally justified in exercising that right in a particu- lar case. If fetuses have a full and equal right to life, then perhaps women's right to abort should be exercised only in extreme circumstances. And per- haps we should question further whether fertile human beings — of either sex - are entitled to engage in heterosexual intercourse when they are not willing to have a child and assume the responsibility for it. If popular het- erosexual activities are costing the lives of millions of innocent persons ' (i.e. aborted fetuses), then should we not at least try to give up these activities? On the other hand, if fetuses do not yet have a substantial right to life, then abortion is not nearly so difficult to justify. IV QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MORAL STATUS OF FETUSES When in the development of a human individual does she or he begin to have a full and equal right to life? Most contemporary legal systems treat birth as the point at which a new legal person comes into existence. Thus, infanticide is generally classified as a form of homicide, whereas abortion-
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Find the attached completed work, If you have another one, please invite me to bid. Kindly give me a 5 star review to build my profile.

Surname 1
Name
Course
Tutor
Date
Arguments in Favor of Abortion
Legalizing abortion is one of topics that has created huge divisions among people in the
societal, professional, religious, and political realms. Abortion is a medical process that is
conducted on pregnant women that aims to remove the pregnancy or remove the fetus before it
can survive outside the uterus. It is considered to be the ending of life of a fetus before it has
been born. In many medical facilities, abortion is induced by the medical profession where the
practice is legal and the consent of the mother or pregnant woman has been given. Abortion still
continues to raise sharp differences among people. There are many countries that have in the
recent past legalized the practice whereas others have outlawed the practice. There are many
arguments in favor of abortion that develop reasons why governments and policymakers need to
legalize the medical process.
One of the major reasons that is used to support abortion is based on the fact that women
need to be offered the right to do whatever they want with their bodies. The state or other
religious or political bodies should not have the authority to decide what is best for people in the
society. Outlawing abortion is thereby seen as an infringeme...


Anonymous
Just what I needed. Studypool is a lifesaver!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags