Moral Impermissibility of Abortion Albert

Moral Impermissibility of Abortion

Albert Camus, French philosopher and one of the youngest Nobel Prize winners for literature said that "freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better" ("Freedom quotes- Albert Camus"). The question is: to what extent are we willing to take the chance and truly be better, while being free? How many of us perceive freedom as an opportunity to do things the right way, and not the easy way? Are we really fully prepared to be completely free, as in constantly responsible and focused on what is morally correct, that means undamaging to anyone else?

An abortion refers to a natural, spontaneous (miscarriage) or an induced, artificial (chemical or surgical) "expulsion or removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus, resulting in or caused by its death" ("Abortion"). As for the moral and legal aspects of induced abortion, there are still vivid controversies and intense debates surrounding them. Where individuals stand when it comes to delicate subjects like abortion has everything to do with their beliefs, with their personal experience and own value system sitting on an educational foundation that can direct things one way or the other. Concerning the problem of artificial abortion, two well-defined points-of-view have caught the public's attention: one that is in favor of legal abortion named pro-choice, and one that is against legal abortion named pro-life, sustained by advocacy groups ("Abortion debate"). Although labeling positions on this matter, as pro-choice or pro-life, is a simplistic, somewhat shallow way of resuming things to radical points-of-view, this are the ones to dived society and create controversy, on both ethical and legal dimensions.

Controversy always springs from the collision of opposite ideas or beliefs. In the abortion issue, the two sides formed on two main principals, freedom of choice and right to life, bring arguments to sustain their opinions. "The central dilemma in the abortion debate is the clash of presumed and perceived rights" ("Abortion debate"), referring to the fetus presumed right to life and also to a woman's right to manage her own body in any way she thinks is proper. The debate revolves around the concept of personhood and its beginnings, or in other words, a matter or considering the fetus a person, with feelings, emotions and reactions to pain or pleasure, thus protected by the laws stating the inalienability of fundamental human rights. The pro-choice point-of-view says that the impermissibility of induced abortion is far more likely to violate the woman's fundamental right to her own body and her own destiny, than the fetus's. The sustaining argument against impermissibility of abortion is the fact that the fetal-personhood theory is untenable as there are no scientific or clear, undoubted proof that a fetus is a person who can feel pain and has the untouchable right to life. The woman, on the other hand, is a living, breathing person, capable of making decisions concerning her health and her future. An unwanted child, say pro-choice groups, is a less desirable option and a less healthier solution than an abortion, because an unwanted child will undoubtedly feel a mother's regret and even emotional restrain, which can negatively affect him/her on the long run, with consequences hard to predict on his/her further development. Every woman has a right to control her body, has a right to chose what is best for her and for her personal future.

But being free and having rights does not make it all about oneself. Having the possibility to chose is a wonderful gift, a logical recognition of the unbounded nature of the human spirit. The right to chose, however, comes after the birth given right to life. Since we take the first breath of air we are given (not by man, but by a higher individuality) the undisputed right to live and develop. And this right is/should be undeniably ours until we breathe our last.

It's although fair to ask ourselves: isn't it a bit late? Do we not deserve the right to life since before birth? As an unborn child, do we not have the right to be protected and cared for? Who is in title to exercise our right to life and choice when we are unborn?

The pro-life point-of-view takes into consideration just that. Of course every woman has a right to her own body and her own choices! But her own freedom is limited by her child's (born or unborn) freedom and right to life. The pro-life arguments state that a fetus is in fact a real-life person in the making. Is true there's no supporting scientific evidence for the beginning of personhood, but what if an unborn child has a soul and can actually feel pain? Isn't then artificial abortion a crime? Just because we are not sure, we should take the most radical solution that we can and are allowed to by law?

This is the first solid argument to sustain the moral impermissibility of induced abortion. Because having an abortion equals the death of a life growing inside, as a natural result of unprotected sexual intercourse. It is therefore considered that the new life, the fetus, did not have a choice. And having an artificial abortion furthermore deprives him/her of the right to chose (whether to live or not). So, if it's about the right to chose and the freedom to decide your own destiny, an intentional removal of a growing life is not and can never be the right answer.

Even if we can't undoubtedly say that it is in fact a person, there is "something too human about a fetus which looks so much like a baby" (Cline) that should make us think twice, because "the ability to kill something which looks like a baby is one which we should avoid"(Cline).

Abortion is not only about the fetus, either. When facing a moral dilemma like this, science can also give a helping hand in trying to determine a woman to make the right decision. Thus another valid argument sustaining the pro-life point-of-view is the moral burden the mother feels after going through an abortion. As any other traumatic experience, abortion induces delayed negative psychological effects, including guilt, anger, anxiety, depression and sense of loss, even suicide, regarded as symptoms for Post-Abortion Syndrome ("Post-Abortion Syndrome"). Studies and statistics say that "70% of aborting women expressed general disapproval of abortion, yet tended to rationalize themselves as exceptions to the rules" ("Post-Abortion Syndrome"), "women who have had abortions are nine times more likely to attempt suicide than women in the general population"("Post-Abortion Syndrome"), and also that "91% of abused children are from planned pregnancies"("Post-Abortion Syndrome") and that "child abuse is more frequent among mothers who previously had an abortion" ("Post-Abortion Syndrome"). Is therefore clear that is not with a light heart a woman resorts to abortion. And even when she willingly and free of any soul searching decides to have an abortion, negative effects undoubtedly appear, and leave ugly, painful, often permanent marks of remorse and shame.