Deontology vs. Utilitarianism in an Abortion Ethics Case
This paper analyzes an applied ethics case study in which four individuals — Maria, Jessica, Marco, and a physician — hold conflicting moral positions on whether to continue a pregnancy involving a fetus diagnosed with significant disabilities. The paper identifies the ethical theories underlying each character's reasoning: deontological ethics and the concept of imago Dei inform Maria and Jessica's opposition to abortion, while Marco's position reflects utilitarian concern for family wellbeing, and the physician's stance draws on teleological ethics oriented toward patient quality of life. The author concludes by disclosing a personal alignment with the deontological position, citing the sanctity of potential human life.
- Introduction to the Case and Ethical Frameworks: Overview of four characters and their ethical positions
- Deontological Reasoning: Maria and Jessica: Deontology and imago Dei inform opposition to abortion
- Utilitarian and Teleological Reasoning: Marco and the Physician: Wellbeing and quality-of-life arguments support termination
- Comparing the Four Positions: Each character's reasoning elaborated and contrasted
- Personal Ethical Stance: Author aligns personally with deontological ethics
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds each character's position in a named ethical theory, demonstrating applied rather than abstract moral reasoning.
- Connects the concept of imago Dei to deontological duty, showing how religious and philosophical frameworks can converge.
- Maintains a clear first-person disclosure of the author's own stance without conflating personal opinion with the case analysis.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative ethical analysis — taking a single dilemma and systematically mapping competing moral frameworks onto different stakeholders. Each framework (deontology, utilitarianism, teleology) is introduced with a direct quotation from a course text before being applied to a character, modeling the citation-to-application move expected in undergraduate ethics writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper moves through three numbered response sections. The first identifies the ethical theories at work for all four characters. The second elaborates on how each theory shapes each character's specific reasoning about the disabled fetus, financial burden, and patient rights. The third shifts to first-person reflection, with the author explaining their personal alignment with deontological ethics. References follow APA style throughout.
Introduction to the Case and Ethical Frameworks
This case study presents four individuals — Maria, Jessica, Marco, and a physician — who hold conflicting moral positions regarding whether to continue a pregnancy in which the fetus has been diagnosed with significant disabilities. Their disagreement reflects three distinct ethical frameworks: deontological ethics, utilitarianism, and teleological ethics.
Deontological Reasoning: Maria and Jessica
The first ethical framework evident in the case study is deontology, which shapes both Maria and Jessica's positions. They each regard life as sacred and therefore feel an obligation never to harm others, regardless of consequences. As Mackinnon and Fiala (2014) explain, "Deontological ethics focuses on duties, obligations, and rights" (p. 111). Because abortion causes harm to the unborn fetus, Maria and Jessica feel they cannot permit it.
Referencing the concept of imago Dei — the theological idea that human beings are made in the image of God — those who oppose abortion often do so under the notion of the innocence of the unborn fetus. A blameless being potentially representing an image of God, and therefore potentially serving a purpose, cannot simply be ended due to circumstance. This is how Jessica and Maria's reasoning applies to the situation of the unborn fetus.
References
Broad, C. (2014). Five types of ethical theory. Routledge.
Eggleston, B., & Miller, D. (2014). The Cambridge companion to utilitarianism. Cambridge University Press.
Kaveny, C. (2016). A culture of engagement. Georgetown University Press.
MacKinnon, B., & Fiala, A. (2014). Ethics: Theory and contemporary issues. Cengage Learning.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.