When becoming pregnant, one must obtain and practice the skills it takes to become a healthy mother. Yet, in some cases, some women fall short of this due to substance abuse, disorders and/or other external factors. The case of Melissa Rowland is a rather compelling, yet prime example of procreative responsibility. With a record of; felony larceny, two counts of child endangerment and murder. Melissa Rowland was a single mother who had been impregnated four different times and suffered from an arrange of issues. She was diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder, which can be classified as a behavioral disorder. As for Melissa, ODD affected her significantly, “physicians define ODD as a pattern of disobedient, hostile, and defiant behavior …show more content…
The moral status of her one living child was not taken into much consideration. With physicians and authorities jumping to conclusions, the time taken to respond to this case was perceived as relatively short. When it comes to moral status of a human being, one must consider whether someone qualifies for moral consideration. In this case, twin B’s moral status was not taken into consideration. The rights of pregnant women, is an everlasting controversy, “when physicians’ concerns about fetal well being are allowed to supersede both a woman’s judgment about what is best for her family and her right to safeguard her bodily integrity, then this is no principled limitation on state power to police pregnancy and punish pregnant women” (Minkoff, Paltrow, 2013). With that being said, the physicians in this case did not express concern for the fetal well-being, and even the well-being of twin B when she was born. The clear evidence that Melissa did not receive immediate treatment for her concerns should have been a red flag for the physicians from the beginning. In her case, it was clearly stated that the well-being of her other children was significantly poor. Also, that Melissa was unstable. Yet, Melissa received lieu of her imprisonment and was given her surviving child for the time being. Until, she failed to perform simple probation stipulations. Sadly, in my opinion, the surviving twin should have been taken from Melissa through child protective services at the time of birth. As physicians, and as supported, they were allowed to overlook the ability of Melissa’s parenting and do what is best for twin A, and Melissa. Which then, Melissa should have faced her punishment received by court orders. Now let me remind you, Melissa did not comply with her stipulations and her child was removed after the
There are many factors that are taken into consideration when determining if abortion is morally permissible, or wrong including; sentience of the fetus, the fetuses right to life, the difference between adult human beings and fetuses, the autonomy of the pregnant woman, and the legality of abortion. Don Marquis argues that abortion is always morally wrong, excluding cases in which the woman is threatened by pregnancy, or abortion after rape, because fetuses have a valuable future. Mary Anne Warren contends that late term abortions are morally permissible because birth is the most significant event for a fetus, and a woman’s autonomy should never be suspended.
Thomson provides the example of being hooked up for nine months to provide dialysis to an ailing violinist to expose how a fetus’s right to life does not supersede a mother’s right to make medical decisions about her body (48-49). I find that this thought experiment especially helpful in understanding how even though a fetus does have a right to life, because the continuation of their life hinges on the consent of their mother to use her body, it falls to the mother to choose whether or not to allow the fetus to develop to term.
“I argue that it is personhood, and not genetic humanity, which is the fundamental basis for membership in the moral community” (Warren 166). Warren’s primary argument for abortion’s permissibility is structured around her stance that fetuses are not persons. This argument relies heavily upon her six criteria for personhood: A being’s sentience, emotionality, reason, capacity for communication, self-awareness, and having moral agencies (Warren 171-172). While this list seems sound in considering an average, healthy adult’s personhood, it neither accounts for nor addresses the personhood of infants, mentally ill individuals, or the developmentally challenged. Sentience is one’s ability to consciously feel and perceive things around them. While it is true that all animals and humans born can feel and perceive things within their environment, consider a coma patient, an individual suspended in unconsciousness and unable to move their own body for indeterminate amounts of time. While controversial, this person, whom could be in the middle of an average life, does not suddenly become less of a person
In her essay “Abortion, Intimacy, and the Duty to Gestate,” Margaret Olivia Little examines whether it should be permissible for the state to force the intimacy of gestation on a woman against her consent. Little concludes that “mandating gestation against a woman’s consent is itself a harm - a liberty harm” (p. 303). She reaches this conclusion after examining the deficiencies in the current methods used to examine and evaluate the issues of abortion. Their focus on the definition of a “person” and the point in time when the fetus becomes a distinct person entitled to the benefits and protections of the law fails to capture “the subtleties and ambivalences that suffuse the issue” (p. 295). Public debate on the right to life and the right to choose has largely ignored the nature of the relationship between the mother and the fetus through the gestational period and a woman’s right to either accept or decline participation in this relationship.
The criterion for personhood is widely accepted to consist of consciousness (ability to feel pain), reasoning, self-motivation, communication and self-awareness. When Mary Anne Warren states her ideas on this topic she says that it is not imperative that a person meet all of these requirements, the first two would be sufficient. We can be led to believe then that not all human beings will be considered persons. When we apply this criterion to the human beings around us, it’s obvious that most of us are part of the moral community. Although when this criterion is applied to fetuses, they are merely genetic human beings. Fetuses, because they are genetically human, are not included in the moral community and therefore it is not necessary to treat them as if they have moral rights. (Disputed Moral Issues, p.187). This idea is true because being in the moral community goes hand in hand w...
While most expectant mothers are planning for baby showers, shopping for maternity clothes and preparing the baby’s nursery, the incarcerated mother-to-be has to remain in a constant state of alertness and preparedness for situations that can put her and her unborn baby at risk, in an environment that is both intimidating and routinely violent. (Hutchinson et. al., 2008)
The facts of this case show that Roe, who at the time was a single woman, decided to challenge the State of Texas’s abortions laws. The law in that state stated that it was a felony to obtain or attempt an abortion except on medical advice to save the life of the mother (Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 1973). At the time many illegal abortions were being performed in back alleys and in very unsanitary conditions. Therefore, some states began to loosen up on abortion restrictions, in which some women found it easy to travel to another state where the abortion laws were less restrictive and they could find a doctor was willing to endorse the medical requirement for an abortion. Unfortunately, less fortunate or poor women could seldom travel outside their own state to get the treatment, which started to raise questions of fairness. Also, many of the laws were vague; therefore many doctors really didn’t know whether they were committing ...
...e open to all women at any point of pregnancy, and that the woman reserves the right as a fully conscious member of the moral community to choose to carry the child or not. She argues that fetuses are not persons or members of the moral community because they don’t fulfill the five qualities of personhood she has fashioned. Warren’s arguments are valid, mostly sound, and cover just about all aspects of the overall topic. However much she was inconsistent on the topic of infanticide, her overall writing was well done and consistent. Warren rejects emotional appeal in a very Vulcan like manner; devout to reason and logic and in doing so has created a well-written paper based solely on this rational mindset.
Parker, Michael. "The Best Possible Child." Journal of Medical Ethics 33.5 (2007): 279-283. Web. 1 Apr 2011. .
The child could have a serious disorder from something such as the Zika virus and that child or the mother of the child should not be emotionally put through that. I can see the points made by the Pro-live such as abortion is murder, but abortion will most likely stay legalised in most Australian states like it is currently, and it will most likely stay that way. There are variables that could affect her choice. She could be poor, the child could have a birth defect, and so on. Giving her a right to decide whether she should abort the baby it’s entirely her choice. What if the mother was raped or she got pregnant from incest. Would you traumatise this mother with the child of the rapist for 9 months, and would you allow an inbred child that will most likely have a disability and be put through literal
With the guidance of their physician, Baby Does’ parents chose to withhold medical care and surgery due to the conclusion still leaving the child with severe retardation. “Officials at the hospital had the Indiana Juvenile Courts appoint a guardian to determine whether or not to perform the surgery. The court finally ruled in favor of the parents and upheld their right to informed medical decision” (Resnik, 2011). Because of the decision made to withhold surgery and medical care, Baby Doe died five days later of dehydration and pneumonia.
For the protection of the mother’s health the State may regulate abortion. The woman comes first and then the unborn child. Those who are against abortion feel that the State has a responsi...
A pregnant women committed a crime and must serve a 10 ten prison sentence, she is at a crossroads with what to do with the baby, keep it in jail with her or let it die on the streets? The choice is obvious. Mothers should be able to have their babies with them in prison due to a variety of reasons. Having their babies with them in prison helps with the early mother-child bonding that is crucial for the lifelong success of the child, it helps the mother become a better person while reducing the recidivism rate, and because the mothers can raise their children in a safer environment compared to the streets with no assistance.
Over the course of the last century, abortion in the Western hemisphere has become a largely controversial topic that affects every human being. In the United States, at current rates, one in three women will have had an abortion by the time they reach the age of 45. The questions surrounding the laws are of moral, social, and medical dilemmas that rely upon the most fundamental principles of ethics and philosophy. At the center of the argument is the not so clear cut lines dictating what life is, or is not, and where a fetus finds itself amongst its meaning. In an effort to answer the question, lawmakers are establishing public policies dictating what a woman may or may not do with regard to her reproductive rights.
Imagine…the birth of a human being into the world. 9 months of endless anticipation leading to someone’s first chance at seeing the world for the first time. While some enjoy the result of a pregnancy, leading to a new human being entering life, some are not so fond, or just can’t be in such a situation. Abortion is the supposed “cure” to this problem and is, for the most part, done safely. However, one of the factors stopping someone from committing an abortion is the consideration of moral status on the child.