There is a report that has been highly controversial on both ends of the abortion arguments in recent weeks. Two Australian ethicists are now arguing that there is no legitimate difference between an unborn human fetus and a newborn. Therefore, their fact claim is that there should be no difference in the rights of parents to choose whether to terminate an unwanted pregnancy even if the child has already been born. The reasons for this argument are that having a child may cause unknown psychological harm to a mother after the birth and that abortion is not suitable for all families. Opponents are suggesting that because of this claim, people are blurring the lines more and more on where "rightful" termination of a life ends and murder of a human being begins. The ethicists make a policy claim that it should not matter whether or not the child is otherwise healthy. The fact that the newborn does not have the moral reasoning capabilities of an adult human means that their feelings should not be taken into account when deciding whether or not they hold the right to live, and therefore, we need to give parents the ability to terminate the life of their newborn child if they choose.
Link to the News Article:
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/healthscience/2012/March/Ethicists-Argue-for-After-Birth-Abortion/
Link to the Journal Article:
http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full
Amy -
I'd be interested to hear what you think about this argument? How is it made? What types of claims? Are the used effectively? Persuasively?
-Liora
I feel like the most effective argument in this article was where people will draw the line if we agree with the ethicists' feelings that it is okay to terminate a newborn's life because he lacks the reasoning and moral capabilities of an adult. This argument would probably alarm the reader because it has been made very obvious in recent decades that humans do not develop full moral reasoning capabilities until late adolescence, so it makes the reader wonder how far this "right" should go and when it becomes murder.I felt that all of the arguments in this article were quite effective, although they did not provide direct evidence against the ethicists' arguments.
Interesting! Thanks.
-Liora