The goal of Judith Jarvis Thomson in her defense of abortion is to sway the ideas of those who are against abortion by challenging the arguments they give for thinking so. She begins by stating a premise. “For the sake of the argument” a human embryo is a person. This premise is one of the arguments most opponents of abortion use, but as she points out, isn’t much of an argument at all. These people spend a lot of their time dwelling on the fact that the fetus is a person and hardly any time explaining how the fetus being a person has anything to with abortion being impermissible. In the same breath, she states that those who agree with abortion spend a lot of their time saying the fetus is in fact not a person. Either way, no argument is really formed. No reasons are given. For sake of challenging an actual argument, she is disregarding this issue. With this premise out of the way, she addresses the basic argument the pro-choice campaign believes. “Every person has a right to life. So the fetus has a right to life. No doubt the mother has a right to decide what shall happen in and to her body; everyone would grant that. But surely a person’s right to life is stronger and more stringent than the mother’s right to decide what happens in and to her body, and so outweighs it. So the fetus may not be killed; an abortion may not be performed.” The remainder of her paper is a series of analogies meant to challenge the basic argument mention above. When looking at the analogies separately, they are in no way related to the abortion topic, but the conclusions drawn from each can be applied. Because these examples aren’t directly related to the debate, our emotions won’t necessarily be involved and we can clearly think about what is the “right” thing to do for each specific scenario.…
The first argument and the most basic question on any discussion of abortion is whether the fetus, or unborn child, is a human person or not. On the pro-life side, people argue that the fetus is "a human within a human". In the context of biology, a fetus is “alive” as it grows in the mother’s womb by time to time due to the cell division. On the pro-choice side people tend to argue that a child can only be consider…
The topic of abortion is a highly controversial issue in today's society, and various views are held concerning the morality of the procedure. Some people feel that abortion is simply cold-blooded murder, because it is their opinion that a 'foetus' is a human being from the moment of conception. However, others would argue that a foetus is merely insubstantial matter, dependant entirely on its mother's body for survival, with no real life of its own. It is for this reason that pro-abortionists support the woman's choice to undergo abortion. After all, why should something so small and insignificant, which is not yet human, be entitled to the same rights and privileges a real human has"…
Recent cases have drawn attention to the issue of individual autonomy, and what is sometimes referred to as ‘the right to die’. Adult patients who are mentally competent have the right to refuse medical treatment even when that refusal can lead to worsening ill health and even death. This refusal of treatment may only be ignored when statutory law provides for treatment without consent, or a judge makes an order that overrides the patient’s consent. While this is largely accepted when patients are physically and mentally competent, it becomes a complex issue when a person is mentally competent, but due to physical incapacity are in care because they are unable to care for themselves. A person may be mentally competent but due to being a quadriplegic…
Paper #2: Jane English and the Analogy of the Hypnotized Attackers Mario P. Martinez November 6,1997 For our next paper I plan on discussing abortion as a social issue. I want to do this in the form of a critical paper This seems to be a very sticky subject and is one of the topics we had in our class that was very interesting to me with a lot of room for interpretation as to when it is or is not o.k. to abort the fetus if it should ever be done at all. The argument I plan to discuss is Jane English's analogy of the hypnotized attackers which was not one of our readings, but one I came across in some research I did for this upcoming paper.…
When we are discussing the argument of abortion the idea of personhood is raised. Personhood is the status of being a person; it is the quality or condition of being an individual person. Personhood might be claimed when looking at the…
In 2008, the President’s Council on Bioethics published the ‘Controversies in the Determination of Death’. Within the publication, the Council discusses the various criterions that need to be met in order for death to be declared. The criterions include those of a neurological level, which have been observed for over three decades. Although there have recently been objections to the neurological criterion in regards to death determination, the Council decided to maintain the criterion. In keeping the neurological criterion, the Council was correct, but the justification of the criteria is insufficient.…
In Acting to Let Someone Die, Andrew McGee critiques the medical ethics view that withdrawing life-sustaining treatment (LST) or life support is an act of killing in contrast to the idea that withdrawing LST is simply an omission rather than an act. He focuses mainly, however, not on whether withdrawing LST is an omission or an act but whether the withdrawal lets the person die or kills them, concluding that providing LST merely postpones death and its withdrawal just lets the person die of the original causes that initiated the LST in the first place. I plan to assess McGee’s discussion of the difference between withholding and withdrawing life-saving treatment, a distinction that he ultimately decides does not exist, and the idea that there…
Because there are so many complicated situations, there will always be a varying factor in the matter. The Uniform Declaration of Death Act makes a generally acceptable definition for death in which the medical system strictly abides. However, because of advances in medical technology, patients in a vegetable state can be kept alive by the use of ventilation and feeding tubes. The legal system is constantly challenged by the definition of death because they must still pay for medical treatments even though the individual has permanent termination of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem. Lia’s situation perfectly highlights this battle between legal and medical systems. The issue on describing a perceptible definition for death will continuously exist as long as new advances in medicine…
In Thomson’s paper “A defense of Abortion,” she argues that abortion is morally permissible in some cases. Within the subject of abortion is the circular argument of if a fetus should be classified, and therefor given the same rights, as a person. One of the common opinions among lawmakers is that a fetus’s classification as a person begins at its viability. Others argue that a fetus is a person at the first sign of brain activity. There is no way to definitive answer so Thomson side steps this by assuming for the sake of argument that a fetus is a person and even such, there are cases where abortion should still be considered morally permissible. Thomson effectively argued or the moral permissibility…
Personhood status does not appeal to the notion of biological or genetic humanity; therefore, we should establish whether a fetus is a person. She fashions a standard requirements for individuals to qualify as a person. A person should have the following abilities:…
An idea central to the abortion debate is personhood and when a foetus can be classed as a person. There are many different beliefs e.g. at the age of viability, at conception, at birth, when the foetus has a heartbeat etc. J Glover said that determining the point at which a foetus can be considered a person is logically impossible and to attempt to do so is like trying to define at what point a cake mix becomes a cake. Peter Singer said that a person is someone who has the ability to plan and anticipate ones future and since the foetus is unable to do this, it isn’t a person. Singer believed that the right to life is grounded in personhood and therefore abortion can be justified. However, this definition has flaws in that it fails to include babies and young children, as well as the mentally disabled, surely all of which we class as people? Mary Anne Warren suggested the following criteria to define a person;…
Abortion is a legal and necessary medical procedure to have available in the United States. Despite spiritual, emotional, or physical beliefs, the basic truth of any right or law is that a person is free to express his or her opinion and to fight for causes, provided it does not harm another person. This concept could also be applied to the issue of abortion. Though some may argue that a woman who gets an abortion is, in fact, harming another person, medical research has yet to define personhood as happening in the “moment of conception.” Personhood (which is what the concept would apply to) is defined as happening in the “moment of birth” (ProCon.org, 2012).…
The flaw in these arguments are, when do we call a fetus a person? From a religious standpoint they believe that when the fetus arrives it is a person. Most believe when the nervous system is made, because it can feel pain like an abortion. However this stage does not happen until the 6th or 7th month and abortion never occurs after the 24th week.…
Personhood begins after a fetus becomes "viable" (able to survive outside the womb) or after birth, not at conception. [31] [32] Embryos and fetuses are not independent, self-determining beings, and abortion is the termination of a pregnancy, not a baby. A person's age is calculated from birth date, not conception, and fetuses are not counted in the US Census. The majority opinion in Roe v. Wade states that "the word 'person,' as used in the Fourteenth Amendment [of the US Constitution], does not include the unborn." [49]…