Why Abortion is Wrong - Assignment Example

Why Abortion is Wrong! The moral standing of abortion has long been a topic of debate among the scientists, doctors, and philosophers. Owing to the difficulties associated with the modern way of living, increased cost of living and the extra-marital affairs, the percentage of people that opt for abortion is increasing rapidly. By getting the child aborted, the mother not only commits the murder of her own child, but also exposes her own health to innumerable risks. Abortion is justified on the basis of the opinion that a fetus is not a human being. There is no point thinking that a baby that is in the developing stage of become a complete human being is not a human. An embryo is just as human as its parents are. Won’t a proponent of abortion call a baby tomato a tomato because it is not full in size? He/she certainly will call that a tomato. It is nature’s decision that it has caused certain species to develop inside their mothers’ wombs e.g. animals and has allowed other species to develop on their own e.g. fruits and birds. A baby is not a baby only as long as the sperm has not mated with the ovum. It can be so said because individual sperms or eggs can not develop on their own or multiply in the number of cells and grow unless the two fuse together and the commencement of the development process happens. The embryo should be considered a human because it has its own DNA right from the conception. It does not require any interference or help in order to grow into a human. It lives along with the mother. The mother does not have to exert at all in order to make the embryo grow into a human. Proponents of abortion claim that it is right to kill a fetus because it is not a human. Let’s assume for a moment that the fetus is not a human being only because it is not that developed. If this is supposed to be true, then all people who have born but with some kind of disability should also be considered non-human. If to be human means to have a complete body with two eyes, lips, nose, two hands, and two feet, then anybody that is deprived of one or more of these features is essentially a non-human because he/she does not comply with the definition of being human. According to such an inconsiderate and disrespectful definition of humanity, a boy with a crouch limping across the road is not a human being. Nothing can be a bigger blow to the sanctity of humanity than a belief in such a definition of humanity! Let’s look at the matter from the perspective of the well acknowledged and widely accepted theory of consequentialism. Consequentialism is a term used for all moral theories that judge the appropriateness of a decision from its consequences. According to the theory of consequentialism, if the consequences of a decision are good, the decision is right and vice versa. An act that is morally good will necessarily produce a favorable outcome. To abort a child gives pain to the fetus because a fetus has intelligence and it is alive. It can feel pain. Abortion gives pain to the fetus, which is the first bad outcome of the decision of abortion. Abortion may endanger the life of mother along with the child. Even if the mother’s life is not at stake, there are cases in which a woman loses her ability to bear children in the future after an abortion, which is the second bad outcome. Let’s suppose the child had to be aborted because if it was allowed to survive, it would have been a cause of embarrassment not only for the mother but for the whole family because the people would have come to know of the sinful act of the mother who had performed fornication outside marriage or before marriage. There is no reason to justify abortion in this case either because there are millions of married couples who could not have children and would love to adopt. If an unwanted child gets adopted by voluntary parents, this consequence would be far better than the child getting aborted. Thus, by all means, the theory of consequentialism fully condemns the act of abortion. Abortion increases a woman’s susceptibility for breast cancer. According to the Professor of Endocrinology, Dr. Joel Brind, from the Baruch College, City University NY who has conducted extensive research upon breast cancer, and has involved the staff at Mount Sinai Hospital in NY and that at the Beth Israel Hospital NY in the research, “Every study of induced abortions performed before the first live birth is consistent with an initial increase in risk of at least 50 percent” (Africa Christian Action). The research results of Dr. Joel Brind have been submitted to the Journal of American Medical Association and have been peer reviewed, which speaks of the validity of argument made by him. Considering his research valid and reliable, abortion exposes a woman to a great deal of risk of breast cancer that can prove life taking in extreme cases. When a woman becomes pregnant for the first time, the level of oestrogen rises which results into the division of the breast cells and they become mature enough to be able to secrete milk. While the cells divide, their susceptibility to carcinogens increases manifolds. The cells stop dividing when the pregnancy becomes full term so that the initial rise of oestrogen is counterbalanced. Abortion causes interruption in this natural process and the maturity of breasts is hindered, and they get at risk of acquiring breast cancer – another unwanted consequence! Abortion is never a quick fix! Risks for the mother include but are not limited to: Ectopic pregnancies, Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (reported in up to 30% of all cases11), subsequent infertility and miscarriages, future premature births (often because of a cervix that was damaged during the previous abortion), small-for-dates babies and placenta praevia, which is 7-15 times more common among women who have had abortions than among those who have not. (Africa Christian Action). For the proponents of abortion and others who justify abortion as a practice overlooking its emotional concerns, there is a question, “Would you have loved this treatment if your parents had aborted you before you were born?” No one in his/her right state of mind would approve of such a behavior of the parents, and would rather consider it a murder. An embryo is defenceless. It needs special care from the parents because it is totally upon their disposal. An embryo can not stand up and speak for its right. Therefore, a mother needs to respect the rights of her developing baby and must not kill her. Having realized these rights, “[u]nder previous presidential administrations, the Mexico City Policy had banned funding to international organizations performing abortions and/or providing counseling to women considering the option” (Messenger and Dorothy 357). In addition to such steps, government should take measures to improve the health rights of women in general like promoting the family planning programs among the people, and making the laws consistent with religious teachings (Hourieh, Abolghasem, and Feizollah). Abortion is a very dangerous practice that essentially speaks of the morally retrograded society. It is not only a murder of the child but is also extremely dangerous for the health of the mother that undergoes abortion. Owing to the dangers of abortion, government needs to reduce it by way of implementing programs that strengthen family planning. Works Cited: Africa Christian Action. “Profile: 10 Arguments Against Abortion.” 2003. Web. 21 Jun. 2011. . Hourieh, Shamshiri-Milani; Abolghasem, Pourreza; and Feizollah, Akbari. “Knowledge and Attitudes of a Number of Iranian Policy-makers towards Abortion.” J Reprod Infertil. Vol. 11. no. 3. Messenger, Erica, and Dorothy, Seyler. Argument! NY:McGraw-Hill, 2011. Print. Read More