In a world marked by moral, ethical, and legal complexities, few issues elicit as much passionate debate as abortion. Abortion as a topic has, for a long time, presented mixed emotions, with several diverging and converging ideas being presented to provide elaborations on the arguments. Some of the arguments that have been presented in support of the acceptability are the evidence from the woman’s autonomy on choice and reproductive freedom, while some oppose it on the grounds of the sanctity of life and the moral protection of the unborn life. Navigating this contentious terrain of arguments requires critically examining the multifaceted nature of abortion discourse, considering philosophical, scientific, legal, and socio-cultural perspectives (Niţă & Ilie Goga, 2020). The paper below argues for the acceptability of abortion while also presenting some counterarguments to understand this dynamic issue.
The concern about respect for individual autonomy is the first element upon which abortion needs to be accepted. Autonomy is an ethical consideration that ascertains that each needs to be given a chance to decide on the health activities carried on them. In the realm of abortion, the principle posits that women have the absolute right to decide whether to continue with a pregnancy. The principle uses examples of organ donation and blood transfusing, stating that just as individuals have the freedom to donate or not, women have a right to either keep or terminate the pregnancy. Denying women the right to abortion is a violation of this principle, making them undergo emotional and physical and emotional changes against their will (Loll et al., 2019). Through recognition and showing respect for bodily autonomy, society can appropriately acknowledge individuals’ agency over their own bodies, ensuring that they are not subjected to involuntary medical interventions or forced reproductive choices. Top of Form
There is concern about the health risks related to keeping the pregnancy from the other element upon which abortion needs to be accepted. The procedure must be regarded as one that can quickly alleviate other issues. In an instance where keeping the pregnancy can jeopardize the life of the mother, abortion becomes the ideal option. A typical example of this situation is when the pregnancy exacerbates conditions like diabetes and hypertension. In this type of situation, abortion becomes the best available alternative to keeping the pregnancy. Further, in the cases of a sexual assault, carrying the pregnancy to term can easily subject the mother to emotional trauma, thus exacerbating mental health issues like depression and anxiety (Aiken et al., 2021). Allowing women to have safer abortions is an elaboration of priority for the lives of pregnant women against risks that may emerge as a result of keeping the pregnancy.
Further, concern about the quality of life upon which the child will receive forms the other justification for the acceptability of abortion. The concept of quality of life underscores the profound implications of bringing an unwanted or unplanned child into the world. Children born into circumstances where they may lack adequate care, support, or opportunities for development face significant challenges that can detrimentally affect their well-being. The situations of extreme poverty form the ideal example in which the issue of abortion can be morally accepted as it can easily subject the unborn child to unhealthy cases due to the limited affordability of healthcare services. Further, forcing the pregnant mothers to keep the pregnancy can easily perpetuate a cycle of poverty and disadvantage, thus inhibiting the parents’ ability to provide basic amenities (Aiken et al., 2021). This consideration ultimately recognizes the complexities in parenthood to ensure that pregnant mothers are allowed to decide on keeping pregnancies based on their situations.
The women’s socioeconomic status forms the other consideration upon which abortion is acceptable. When women are given the chance to decide their reproductive choices, they can quickly pursue their educational and career opportunities uninterrupted by parenthood’s responsibilities. For example, access to abortion allows women to complete their education, even advance in their careers, and attain financial stability before deciding to settle for the family. Contrastingly, denying women access to abortion services accelerates cycles of poverty and inequality, limiting their full participation in the workforce to propel the economic state and development (Foster et al., 2018). By ensuring women’s access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare, including abortion services, society promotes gender equality and empowers women to control their futures, thereby fostering more equitable and prosperous communities.
The concern for the sanctity of life forms the first counterargument against abortion. This concept is deeply rooted in the belief that human life starts at conception and that life is considered very sacred. With these considerations, termination of the pregnancy through abortion is morally equivalent to taking a human life. The advocates of this belief argue that every individual has a right to life and that even unborn children have an equal moral right to other human beings and, therefore, require legal protection from harm, including acts like abortion. Further, the opposers of abortion argue that it goes against the societal values that have a very high regard for every human’s life regardless of their age, situation, or circumstance (Clarke, 2022). Ultimately, the concern for the sanctity of human life considers abortion a morally wrong idea due to the inherent violation and disregard for the value of human life, especially for the unborn fetus. Top of FormTop of Form
The potential psychological and emotional consequences form the other argument presented against abortion. In this consideration, termination of the pregnancy can easily translate to negative mental implications like feelings of regret, grief, and guilt. Further, the opponents against abortion argue that the subjection of women to abortion can easily subject them, women, to long-term distress phases, experiencing depression and anxiety. This consideration can profoundly affect the women’s well-being, underscoring their mental status (Aiken et al., 2021). From this perspective, abortion is seen as harmful to women’s psychological and emotional health, warranting consideration of alternatives that prioritize both physical and mental well-being.
In conclusion, abortion needs to be acceptable based on factors such as recognizing and upholding the fundamental rights of individuals, particularly women, to autonomy, health, and socioeconomic agency. Showing respect for female autonomy allows them to make decisions about their bodies. Further, concern about the related health risks forms another concern justifying the acceptability of abortion among pregnant mothers. Acknowledgment of the socioeconomic empowerment of women forms the last consideration upon which abortion needs to be acceptable. In this regard, women need to have a chance to accomplish their dreams and aspirations, and abortion being an impediment to the achievement of their desires, needs to be acceptable to allow them to have a smoother pursuit. Some of the counterarguments against abortion are the concern of the sanctity of human life and the related fear of the psychological effects. Therefore, it is imperative to affirm the acceptability of abortion as a fundamental aspect of reproductive rights and social justice.
Aiken, A., Lohr, P. A., Lord, J., Ghosh, N., & Starling, J. (2021). Effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 128(9). https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16668
Clarke, S. (2022). The sanctity of life is a sacred value. Bioethics, 37(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13094
Foster, D. G., Biggs, M. A., Ralph, L., Gerdts, C., Roberts, S., & Glymour, M. M. (2018). Socioeconomic Outcomes of Women Who Receive and Women Who Are Denied Wanted Abortions in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 108(3), 407–413. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2017.304247
Loll, D., Fleming, P. J., Manu, A., Morhe, E., Stephenson, R., King, E. J., & Hall, K. S. (2019). Reproductive autonomy and pregnancy decision-making among young Ghanaian women. Global Public Health, 15(4), 571–586. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2019.1695871
Niţă, A. M., & Ilie Goga, C. (2020). Abortion research: ethics, legislation, and socio-medical outcomes. Case study: Romania. Romanian Journal of Morphology and Embryology, 61(1), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.47162/rjme.61.1.35