Should Abortion Be Further Restricted Or Banned Completely
Should countries like the UK follow Nicaragua in going for an outright ban on abortion or at the least restricting it by having a low time limit amongst other rules. Alternatively should they do the opposite and make sure that abortion rights are defended and extended
You can also add to the debate by leaving a comment at the end of the page.
Sanctity of life : Only god ends life not humans
The Catholic Trust Society greatly opposes abortion:
“We have been created by the almighty God in his own image and likeness. No pregnancy is unplanned because no baby can be conceived unless almighty God intends that conception and the existence will occur.” The Catholic Trust says that the conception of baby is due to the will of God and a human being has no right to kill that baby, it is ethically unacceptable and morally wrong.
Every person has a right to life. So the foetus has a right to life. No doubt the mother has a right to decide what shall happen in and to her body; everyone would grant that. But surely a person’s right to life is stronger and more stringent than the mother’s right to decide what happens in and to her body, and so outweighs it which defends abortion as the mother is of more importance. In extreme circumstance an ectopic pregnancy is when the fertilised ovum becomes attached to the wall of the fallopian tube. To continue with the pregnancy would lead to the death of both the mother and the child. In these circumstances, the uterus is removed and the embryo dies. A Christian response to this makes uses of the ‘double-effect’ rule. The doctors intend to save the mother, rather than killing the foetus, so the action is morally permissible. Peter Vardy identified a problem with the ‘double-effect’; new laser technology will enable women to have a safer operation which involves the foetus being ‘lasered’ rather than the fallopian tube removed. The result for the mother is much better, but it’s difficult to suggest that the death of the foetus in this case is a secondary feature. All that is really different is the intention of the doctor. Vardy draws a line at a particular point in the foetus’ development to indicate that before this point the foetus is tissue, and after is a person but it is hard to know when.
Abortion helps raise the spectre eugenics against Disabled people rather than provide equality
Pro life charities argue that having an abortion is opposite to treatment of all people as equal. This is because it places a lower value than and promotes a societies view as seeing it as expendable . Currently between over 90% of Downs syndrome foetuses are terminated rather than being allowed to develop the chance to live their lives after their parents receive a pre natal diagnosis [[Jennie Bristow " Abortion Review Comment: Down's Syndrome, live births and statistics," British Pregnancy Advisory Service "http://www.abortionreview.org/index.php/site/article/452/ Accessed 03.06.09]]. This is partly because of entrenched medical model attitudes and expectations that see disability as something to be eliminated rather than as something to be treated as an equal part of the human experience. Furthermore it also raises the spectre of the T-4 Action programme a campaign by the Nazi's in Germany to eliminate disabled people through gassing them. This was something that culminated in the killing of an estimated 30,000 people although the figure has been put as high as 400,000 in the past. [[ The American Israeli Co-operative Enterprise "The T-4 Euthanasia Program"http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/t4.html Accessed 03.06.2009]]
Disabled people aren't just asexual. We're both adult male and female oh and not to forget transexual . More to the point if we're female just like other non disabled women we want the right to have control over our own bodies[[ National Union of Students "Liberation Officers in Every Union"http://resource.nusonline.co.uk/media/resource/2007_liberation_officers]] . While there may be a high amount of people being aborted further restrictions or a blanket ban is not the way about eliminating the prejudice towards disabled people which can easily be shown by people who are anti abortion in other ways. Instead more opportunities should be given to provide information to women who are going through pre-natal tests or thinking about the possibility of having one. Also pro choice groups like abortion rights support the social model supporting the equal treatment of people with physical disabilities, something that includes over access to abortion. [[ Abortion Rights "statement on disability" http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/content/view/40/129/%5D%5D
Case of Human Rights
Contrary to popular belief not all pro life organisations are religiously motivated,such as The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children. It argues that abortion is a violation of human rights as enshrined three major treaties that have been ratified by the majority of countries in the world today.[[ Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child "Abortion Briefing" http://www.spuc.org.uk/ethics/abortion/%5D%5D Firstly the 1949 Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that in article 3 that: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person"[[United Nations "Universal Declaration of Human Rights http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/%5D%5D . This article, although it doesn't mention abortion it does use the phrase "right to life" which implies those that are not yet born as well as those that are born have rights. Secondly The 1959 Declaration of the rights of the child specifically mentions unborn rights [[ Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child http://www.spuc.org.uk/ethics/abortion/%5D%5D. This is enshrined in Principle 4 which states that:" The child shall enjoy the benefits of social security. He shall be entitled to grow and develop in health; to this end, special care and protection shall be provided both to him and to his mother, including adequate pre-natal and post-natal care. The child shall have the right to adequate nutrition, housing, recreation and medical services." Notice the words" pre natal care" that allude to a pre birth state something which enshrines the rights of the unborn child.[[Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/25.htm Accessed 03.06.09]]. This is also bolstered by the 1976 International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights [[ Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child http://www.spuc.org.uk/ethics/abortion/%5D%5D
The Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Child and the Declaration of the rights of the child are exactly what they set out to be: Declarations that have no binding or legal authority so they do not confer any rights and should be seen as aspirational. Furthermore the UN convention on the rights of Persons with Disabilities which was ratified in 2008 ( which is binding to member states) provide sexual and reproductive rights for women [["Backgrounder: Disability Treaty Closes a Gap in Protecting Human Rights" http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=476 Accessed for 5.06.09]]. The Convention on The Rights of Persons with Disabilities does this in article 25 section a [[http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf Accessed 5.06.09]] . Reproductive rights as well as sexual health mean that a women has access and control over how many children she has, if any. While it may fly in the face of policies such as the One Child Policy employed by the People's Republic of China, it also flies in the face of the policy employed by Nicaragua restricting abortion.
A Foetus Is A Person
A foetus is effectively an unborn baby, and (barring any biological complications), following pregnancy it will be born as a complete human being.
There is more options for a child then just abortion. Giving the child to an orphanage, or you can give it (for a set amount of time) to a police station or medical center. You do not need to abort the child just because you think it will grow up wrong.
Yes it will be born into a human being,but because the mother is looking at this option,their is obviously a reason either their age or financial situation.If mothers are forced to have their babys which are recognised by them as mistakes,they will not take proper care of the child .We do not want this baby born into a human being knowing crime,poverty and destitution.And this will have an endless negative affect on the unready mother.
It is a question of what makes us human. If all that makes us human is a set of biological impulses, then we may as well all be drones. The things that make us human are not our necessities, eating, sleeping, shitting. It is our personality - this does not develop in the womb. A foetus is no more aware of it's existence than a fruit fly. Why force a human being to carry a gestation, causing extreme emotional and physical torment, purely for the continued dissemination of a profligate species.
It's a natural survival instinct to be pro life, but if you approach the subject rationally you'd come to a different conclusion.
YOU are the one responsible, but YOU have to face the consequences of your actions
When you even have to go into the abortion situation, you realize that you decided to have sex, and you have to face the consequences of your actions. If your not ready for a child, then your not ready for sex.
People often enter into sex knowing that they have been careful and taken the proper precautions. A small percentage of the population are unlucky. The human body is extremely adept at encouraging pregnancy. It is extremely narrow minded to neglect the human impulses which entice sexual desire. Some people are raped, were they asking for it?
should abortion be restricted
abortion should be restricted because some people will become irresponsible having unprotected sex knowing that she will do abortion and it can increase rates of infection.
If abortion is easily accessible but well regulated by proper medical professionals this will not happen. If those people are that irresponsible they were likely to be so prior to a change in abortion law. Most people are capable of administering their own moral values and do not require discipline from the state.
A woman's right to choose and control what goes on in her body
A woman has ulitimate control over her life and her body and whether that includes whether she chooses to keep a unintended foetus or not. People whether they be religious clerics or secular nurses can not just force a woman to have a baby she is opposed to having it as she may not be .
Denying reproductive rights is a form of opression by a paternalistic society and should be treated as such. The right should be extended rather than restricted because of a number of reasons in getting an abortion women can have a number of legitimate reasons for doing so. For instance changes in circumstances can affect both single and married women in the form of seperation or divorce from a partner, problems like "brain damage" or severe illnesses affecting existing children[[ Voice for Choice " Why women need late abortions" Accessed on 5.09.06 http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/images/stories/vfc%20later%20abortion%20briefing.pdf%5D%5D
Finally the person affected by a condition has the right to make that decision
Orlando Tardencilla one of the people who proposed the law that was passed banning abortion in Nicaragua :"Unless abortion is made a crime, then people can simply come out and say: 'I have the right to an abortion, this is my body and I can decide....That's like saying: 'I'm allowed to commit murder because these hands are mine, this gun is mine.' [[ BBC News Nicragua votes to ban abortions" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6089718.stm Accessed 5.06.09]]This is effectively a demonstration of the anti abortion point of view as it shows the lie in the pro choice theory that people can do something destructive to themselves. There are laws and restrictions on banning drug abuse something that people do to harm themselves.
Public opinion in the UK is in favour of extending abortion rights not reducing them
An ICM poll commissioned for the Rowntree Trust in 2004 estimated 76% of people in the UK support a womans right to choose. That's over three quarters of the UK population including both men and women. Something that shouldn't be discounted. [[Voice for Choice "Why some women need late abortions" http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/images/stories/vfc%20later%20abortion%20briefing.pdf%5D%5D Moreover there is also support for reducing the time delays in abortions being provided for people who had been referred for an abortion[[ Abortion Rights-why women need a modern abortion law and better services http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/content/view/180/121/%5D%5D To impose or restrict abortion rights would be an example of tyranny of a clerical and vocal minority.
Firstly the second survey was a survey of Abortion Rights members not the general population so it may not represent the general populations views by extension. Secondly a poll commissioned in 2005 for the Telegraph showed that 53% of members interviewed were in favour of the limit being reduced to 20 weeks from 24 week[[http://www.icmsearch.co.uk pdfs/2005_march_sunday_telegraph_abortion_survey.pdf#search=%22abortion%22]].. Also a majority of those in favour were female (59% in favour-compared to 28% disapproving and 12% unsure) as well as male meaning that it wouldn't be just a tyrannical and clerical minority doing it [[http://www.icmresearch.co.uk pdfs/2005_march_sunday_telegraph_abortion_survey.pdf#search=%22abortion%22]].
Better to make it legal then illegal
Even if a process is illegal or restricted to far some women who are desperate will still travel to have undergo the process or at the worst go for a back street abortion. For example abortion being illegal in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland has forced a large amount of women travelling to the UK to seek a termination. [[Abortion Rights "Ireland's Hidden Diaspora" http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/content/view/308/118/ Accessed 5.06.09]] At worst a person will seek a back street abortion something that has left to the lives of women being lost or damaged because of injuries due to complications resulting from an abortion.
If a person is committing a crime or are doing something illegal to themselves and the people around them then they are doing so at their own legal, social and physical jeopardy. Restrictive laws in Nicuragua and other countries are merely representing this and allowing for some sort of retribution by society to take place.
Why protect the sanctity of an underdeveloped unconscious biological process over the life of a fearful woman?
Upon gestation in the womb a fetus will not gain the accepted definition of human consciousness, intelligence or self awareness. I cannot remember my life until the age of four. If I had been aborted, there would be no loss to my own self, I would not feel my life, hopes and dreams slip away from me, I would essentially feel the spark of a central nervous system in survival mode at best. We live in an overpopulated world, where famine and social inequality is rife, and to force an unlucky and susceptible woman to go through 3 quarters of a year of pain / discomfort for the sake of OUR beliefs (not hers) is tantamount to slavery / rape. If abortion twists the hand of god, let that woman be accountable to him, the only thing born of unwanted pregnancy is unhappiness. Misery that trickles down through generations.
“If a man does not get his share of happiness……then I say a baby born dead is better off. It does that baby no good to be born…….It never sees the light of day or knows what life is like, but at least it has found rest.” Ecclesiastes 6:3-5
What do you think?