Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Abortion on demand
Section E. Social, moral and religious

Abortion was always considered sinful, and was criminalised in Britain and most states of the USA in the nineteenth century. Backstreet abortions became a usual way to limit the size of families. In Britain, the 1967 Abortion Act legalised abortion when it was advised by a doctor on medical grounds. In the USA, the Roe v. Wade case of 1973 in the Supreme Court set down the principle that in the first three months, abortion is to be allowed; and in the second trimester, it is to be allowed if it is required in the interests of maternal health. In neither country is ’abortion on demand’ — abortions undertaken principally as a form of birth-control at the wish of the pregnant woman — officially allowed, but doctors (especially those in private clinics) will happily certify that carrying the pregnancy to term would cause severe mental distress to the woman. In many Catholic countries, abortion is still illegal.

Pros

[1] It is a woman’s right to decide, in conjunction with the father when appropriate, whether she wishes to have a baby. It is her body and she ultimately should control what happens to it. It is people, not fertilised eggs or foetuses, that have ’rights’.

[2] If abortion is not allowed on demand, women will go to ’backstreet abortionists’ where lack of expertise and unsterile conditions can be a serious risk to health. Such backstreet abortions result in an estimated 68,000 deaths per year, according to recent World Health Organization (WHO) figures.

[3] There is no definitive answer as to when a foetus becomes a person in its own right, but up to 24—28 weeks, the foetus is so undeveloped that it is not reasonable to consider it a person and to accord it rights.

[4] In many areas of the world where overpopulation and chronic food shortage are perennial problems, abortion helps prevent bringing children into the world who would probably know only deprivation, illness, starvation and early death.

[5] In an increasingly secular and scientific world, the religious views of some people about the infusion of a foetus with a soul by God at conception, for example, should not be imposed upon the rest of society.

[6] Many young girls who become pregnant would have their future, their education, their family relationships and their career ruined by the birth of a child. Others are pregnant as the result of rape or incest and would have their suffering multiplied indefinitely by carrying the child to term. We cannot put the alleged ’rights’ of a dividing cluster of cells ahead of such concrete harm to a person.

[7] We allow contraception. Abortion is, in effect, no different — the prevention of the development of a potential human being. In the case of the ’morning after pill’, the analogy is even closer. If we allow these measures, then we should also allow abortion.

Cons

[1] The right to do as we wish to our bodies must be curtailed by the rights of others to be free from harm. In many instances, the right to do as we wish to our body is overruled; for example, drug laws exist to guard against making a person a danger to others by altering their mind with drugs. In this case, the mother’s rights are overruled by the right to life of the unborn child.

[2] One could argue against banning anything on the grounds that people will carry on doing it on the black market. Abortion is morally wrong and banning it will reduce the number of abortions that occur.

[3] A foetus can survive if born prematurely from as early as 20 weeks, and this boundary is being made earlier all the time by improved incubator technology. Given that we cannot be sure at what point a foetus is a person or can feel pain, we should err on the side of caution and consider the foetus a person from conception or shortly afterwards. Abortion, therefore, is murder.

[4] We can address overpopulation in the developing world with other measures such as increased availability of contraception as well as economic and technical aid programmes.

[5] Human life is sacred, as is recognised by the billions of adherents of the main world religions. God creates each individual at conception and so abortion is murder, and an act against the will of God that destroys God’s work.

[6] Young people should be encouraged to have a more responsible attitude to sex and pregnancy, and should deal with the consequences of their actions whatever they may be. There are even schools now specifically for teenage mothers and their babies to attend. In cases of rape or incest, either the child can immediately be put up for adoption, or exceptions could be made just in these distressing instances.

[7] Barrier methods of contraception (condom, cap) are qualitatively different from abortion in that no fertilised egg ever exists to be destroyed. Other methods (coil, ’morning after’ pill) that are logically equivalent to abortion should not be allowed.

Possible motions

This House would put the mother first.

This House believes that the unborn child has no rights.

This House believes that a woman’s body is her temple.

Related topics

Population control

Euthanasia, legalisation of

Surrogate mothers, payment of

Sex education

Contraception for under-age girls