Merriam-Webster defines abortion as a medical procedure used to end a pregnancy and cause the death of the fetus. Abortion is the most difficult and controversial moral issue our society considers and debates. By 1900, the majority of abortions in the United States had been outlawed due to the efforts of physicians, the American Medical Association, and legislators. Feminists such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote against abortion because it was an unsafe medical procedure for women at the time. The debate over abortion raged on until 1973 when the famous Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade, declared the majority of the existing state laws on abortion unconstitutional. Following this case, the terms “pro-choice” and “pro-life” …show more content…
She begins her argument by stating one side’s view, the Anti-Abortionist. Professor Thomson states, “I propose, then, that we grant that the fetus is a person from the moment of conception.” Professor Thomson proceeds to go into the steps of reasoning following this bold statement. She thoroughly discusses the viewpoint and the common belief every person has the right to life. Therefore, assuming the widely held view that a fetus is a person from conception, then the fetus has a right to life. This scholarly article discusses the belief there is no questioning that the mother has the right to determine what occurs to and inside of her body. Obviously, a person's right to life is much more important and demanding than the mother's right to decide what happens to and inside her body, consequently the fetus’ rights are greater in value than the rights of the mother. Therefore, the fetus must not be terminated, so an abortion may not be conducted. However, Professor Thomson's central argument to answer the pending moral question is developed with a thought experiment hence a deep …show more content…
She proceeds to compare being kidnapped and forced to having the violinist attached to your kidneys to that of rape. Thomson considers the thought of deciding whether abortion is morally right in this scenario is also asking the question of how much right to life someone who is conceived in rape has compared to the mother. Thomson contemplates the belief that “those who came into existence because of rape have less.” Less right to life considering all persons do have a right to life however those conceived on grounds of rape happen to have less of a right than those who are not. She continues to compare the thought experiment to the mother’s life being endangered by having to be plugged to the violinist for her entire life however long that may be. She states people against abortion would say it would be “a great pity, and hard on the mother,” but at the same time, “all persons have a right to life, the fetus is a person, and so on.” She argues even though the fetus has a right to life, it does not mean a woman is forced to use her bodily organs to sustain that life such as how one does not have a right to use another’s kidney if one’s kidney has failed. Therefore, the fetus although it has a basic right to life, it does not have a right so strong that it outweighs the pregnant woman’s right to personal bodily autonomy. Thomson
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.
Abortion refers to the termination of one’s pregnancy, resulting in the removal of one’s fetus to prevent it from being born. While the concept is simple enough, the crux of the argument lies in the morality of this procedure and whether or not a woman should be allowed to sacrifice a fetus to better her own life. Abortion must continue to be legalized in order to ensure that women have that choice.
As per the thought experiment, Thomson further argues that abortion only deprives the fetus of the use of a woman’s body and nothing else. This disanalogy is often ignored, for it only strengthens Thomson’s argument. Nitpicking between small differences offers no compelling logic to defeat the thought experiment. Similar to how opponents of Thomson’s rationalization carefully attack the smallest details, a distinction cannot be made of what life is more valuable.
In this essay, I will hold that the strongest argument in defence of abortion was provided by Judith Jarvis Thompson. She argued that abortion is still morally permissible, regardless if one accepts the premise that the foetus is a person from the moment of conception. In what follows, I agree that abortion is permissible in the ‘extreme case’ whereby the woman’s life is threatened by the foetus. Furthermore, I agree that abortion is permissible to prevent future pain and suffering to the child. However, I do not agree that the ‘violinist’ analogy is reliable when attempting to defend abortion involving involuntary conception cases such as rape, whereby the foetus does not threaten the woman’s health. To achieve this, I will highlight the distinction
The typical anti-abortion argument is as follows: 1. Every fetus is a person, 2. Every person has the right to life, 3. Every fetus has the right to life [1,2], 4. Everything that has the right to life may not be killed, 5. Every fetus may not be killed [3,4]. Premise 1 is taken from page 297 in our book when Thompson states, “Most opposition to abortion relies on the premise that the fetus is a human being, a person…” Premise 2 and conclusion 3 are taken from page 298 when Thomson says “Every person has a right to life. So the fetus has a right to life.” Premise 4 is taken from page 298 when Thomson states “So the fetus may not be killed.” She does not explicitly state the premise, "Everything that has the right to life may not be killed," but we can infer this since in the previous premises she stated that every fetus is a person and every person has the right to life. So since that is true then we can substitute fetus for everything that has the right to life, therefore stating everything that has the right to life may not be killed. Conclusion 5 is also not stated directly in Thomson’s paper, but follows directly from the premises that are stated in her paper.
Judith Jarvis Thomson, a 20th century philosopher, offers her argument defending abortion in her paper, “A Defense of Abortion”. She states initially that the fetus has a right to life, although contrary to her argument, she uses it as a premise to develop her thoughts. In short, Thomson says that the fetus’s right to life does not outweigh the woman’s right to control her body. She forces readers to participate in a thought experiment as she gives an odd example about a violinist suffering from kidney failure. The violist is facing death and in order to prevent it, he needs your help. Because you are the only one with his blood type, you are the only hope for him. You have been kidnapped by the Society of Music lovers and, without your consent, hooked up to him and you are filtering his blood and keeping him alive. In order to save his life, you must remain connected to him and support him for nine whole months. Thomson then asks if it is morally wrong to disagree to remain connected to the violinist. It is quite noble to agree to save the man’s life but should his right to life automatically force you to sacrifice nine months of yours?
Abortion, is a safe and legal way to terminate a pregnancy. According to the Guttmatcher Institute (2015), abortions are common, and approximately three in ten American women have an abortion by the time they reach the age of 45. Additionally, a broad array of women in the United States have abortions. Yet, abortion is a controversial issue and has been for decades. It is a topic that many people hold strong feelings for or against. The conversations surrounding the topic of abortion has resulted in protests, dangerous, unfair policies, and violence. The abortion debate heightened in 1973, when the U.S. Supreme court overturned state laws that banned or restricted women’s rights to obtain an abortion during the
Thomson’s main idea is to show why Pro-Life Activists are wrong in their beliefs. She also wants to show that even if the fetus inside a women’s body had the right to life (as argued by Pro – Lifers), this right does not entail the fetus to have whatever it needs to survive – including usage of the woman’s body to stay alive.
Thomson appeals to the strongest case for abortion, rape, to define the rights of the fetus and the pregnant person. Thomson concludes that there are no cases where the person pregnant does not have the right to choose an abortion. Thomson considers the right to life of the pregnant person by presenting the case of a pregnant person dying as a result of their pregnancy. In this case, the right of the pregnant person to decide what happens to their body outweighs both the fetus and the pregnant person’s right to life.
Judith Jarvis Thomson, in "A Defense of Abortion", argues that even if we grant that fetuses have a fundamental right to life, in many cases the rights of the mother override the rights of a fetus. For the sake of argument, Thomson grants the initial contention that the fetus has a right to life at the moment of conception. However, Thomson explains, it is not self-evident that the fetus's right to life will always outweigh the mother's right to determine what goes on in her body. Thomson also contends that just because a woman voluntarily had intercourse, it does not follow that the fetus acquires special rights against the mother. Therefore, abortion is permissible even if the mother knows the risks of having sex. She makes her points with the following illustration. Imagine that you wake up one morning and find that you have been kidnapped, taken to a hospital, and a famous violist has been attached to your circulatory system. You are told that the violinist was ill and you were selected to be the host, in which the violinist will recover in nine months, but will die if disconnected from you before then. Clearly, Thomson argues, you are not morally required to continue being the host. In her essay she answers the question: what is the standard one has to have in order to be granted a right to life? She reflects on two prospects whether the right to life is being given the bare minimum to sustain life or ir the right to life is merely the right not to be killed. Thomson states that if the violinist has more of a right to life then you do, then someone should make you stay hooked up to the violinist with no exceptions. If not, then you should be free to go at a...
Thomson starts off her paper by explaining the general premises that a fetus is a person at conception and all persons have the right to life. One of the main premises that Thomson focuses on is the idea that a fetus’ right to life is greater than the mother’s use of her body. Although she believes these premises are arguable, she allows the premises to further her explanation of why abortion could be
In the article 'A Defense of Abortion' Judith Jarvis Thomson argues that abortion is morally permissible even if the fetus is considered a person. In this paper I will give a fairly detailed description of Thomson main arguments for abortion. In particular I will take a close look at her famous 'violinist' argument. Following will be objections to the argumentative story focused on the reasoning that one person's right to life outweighs another person's right to autonomy. Then appropriate responses to these objections. Concluding the paper I will argue that Thomson's 'violinist' argument supporting the idea of a mother's right to autonomy outweighing a fetus' right to life does not make abortion permissible.
In Thomson’s article, “A Defense of Abortion,” Thomson argues that abortion is not impermis-sible because she agrees with the fact that fetus has already become a human person well before birth, from the moment of conception (Thomson, 268 & 269). Besides that, she also claims that every person has a right to live, does so a fetus, because a fetus is a person who has a right to live.
In A Defense of Abortion (Cahn and Markie), Judith Thomson presents an argument that abortion can be morally permissible even if the fetus is considered to be a person. Her primary reason for presenting an argument of this nature is that the abortion argument at the time had effectively come to a standstill. The typical anti-abortion argument was based on the idea that a fetus is a person and since killing a person is wrong, abortion is wrong. The pro-abortion adopts the opposite view: namely, that a fetus is not a person and is thus not entitled to the rights of people and so killing it couldn’t possibly be wrong.
Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy by destruction of a fertilized egg, embryo or fetus before birth, prior to the time when the fetus attains viability, or capacity for life outside the uterus (Encyclopedia, 1995, p.43). Currently almost twenty-five percent of pregnancies in the United States are aborted. About one forth of people who abort are teenagers, fifty-seven percent are younger than 25, and almost eighty percent are unmarried. During the first trimester is when most of the abortions take place. Only about ten percent are performed later in the pregnancy (Slife, 1998, p.329). Abortions go back as far as Ancient Greece where it was used as a type of population control. Then in the Roman Times men had total control over the procedure. “Man could give law-enforced command that his wife have an abortion, or he could punish or divorce his wife for having one without his consent” (Encyclopedia, 1995, p.43).