The abortion issue is probably the most controversial and emotional topic in modern society, where one side insists on keeping the right to abortion. At the same time, the other sees the issue as a sin committed against the unborn. However, this human life question is the core of the abortion controversy, which focuses on the issue of what stage of development in a woman’s right to bodily autonomy becomes more prior than the life of an embryo (Kaczor, 2022). This ethical puzzle is more than just an abstract issue; it sparkles and reverberates everywhere – in our intimate relations, personal and family lives, religious, philosophical, and legal considerations, and political systems. Proponents of abortion, it is said, think that the life of a human starts from the moment of conception and that from the moment of fertilization, a fetus, which is a living being, has a right to live by its nature. They consider it to be the murder of a child, a violent and unduly cruel act destined to end the life of an innocent human being. Such a principle more frequently stems from a moral and religious background of pro-life supporters who usually avail themselves of relevant teachings of their denomination, including that God-created life is sacred and should be protected at any cost.
Nevertheless, the principal opponents are the pro-life/anti-abortion who accuse the woman of belonging to a class of people who play the role of stewards of her own body and have the authority to make reproductive decisions. These embryos occasionally might be considered as persons because, at the latest stages of the pregnancies, they are equipped with human features; consequently, such private cases as a forced pregnancy against maternal will have been proven to be a violation of autonomy and personal freedom of the woman’s side (Roat, 2022). On the opposite side, those who are pro-life argue that compulsory abortion or birth prevention are violations of the primary human rights of both the pregnant woman and the fetus as well. After all, those in the pro-life camp put forth similar arguments by emphasizing the adverse outcomes of being in an overturned or unplanned pregnancy for women and their families alike, including financial difficulties, pregnancy risks to health, and emotional stress.
While the abortion controversy goes through many complexities, the moral, medical, and juridical aspects associated with it make it even more complex. Modernization and scientific improvement gave rise to the fetus’s mental abilities argument as well as pain awareness from inside itself and the ability to live outside of the womb, which may lead to a change in the moral and ethical limits of abortion (Mackenzie, 2020). In addition, women’s mental well-being is under discussion as well, and the medical aspect of abortion is still unclear, as it is unclear whether it can be negative in the long term for the patient. The scientific discussion on fetal development and consciousness is being furthered with the increasing complexity. Along with medical advancements, the literature on developing the nervous system and the brain has become more refined regarding the timeline. Some researchers propose that fetuses may start to feel primitive kinds of pain and develop the capability to comprehend things long before the previous thoughts on this subject, perhaps to shift the ethical considerations of abortion radically.
Moreover, the gestational age at which a fetus could theoretically survive outside of the uterus also becomes undeniably fluid, always being another milestone of viability passed. Along with such betterment in neonatal care, there is one more thing where the morality and legitimacy of abortion get complicated, and that is the viability threshold, which is an issue (Blackshaw, 2020). Putting these scientific complexities together is already a challenge. The existing lack of consensus on the psychological effects of abortion on women is another issue that you need to think about. Although some studies describe mental health problems as likely after an abortion, caused by depression and anxiety, others either neglect or deny the connections or state that pre-existing conditions or social stigmatization cause these adverse mental health outcomes. This vagueness of the issue only fuels the everlasting contradiction regarding the possible dangers of abortion and the extensive care and guidance.
Legally, the laws and regulations of the states enacting differing laws impede efforts to enforce the process. Though there are some barriers set up by the constitutional precepts of Roe v. Wade in this matter, there has perpetually been an initiative on the part of the legislators to make abortion an option not readily available in different states. Traversing this judicial maze is notably tricky for such women as those out of the leading communities or in deficient financial condition, hence widening the gap of healthcare inequality and unfairness even further (Vanderheide et al., 2019). As the legal frameworks evolve, law enforcement entities will have to tackle the nuances of it, thus bringing the translation issue into a uniform and consistent law application to knowledge.
Moreover, the ethical dimensions of the abortion debate continue to evolve as societal values and beliefs shift. Factors such as religious and cultural norms, personal autonomy, and the rights of the unborn all intersect in complex ways, making it difficult to find a universally accepted moral framework for addressing this sensitive issue. As scientific understanding advances, legal landscapes shift, and ethical perspectives evolve, the abortion controversy remains a multi-faceted and intricate issue that defies simple solutions. Acknowledging and grappling with these complexities is crucial for fostering an informed, nuanced, compassionate dialogue that balances the diverse interests and perspectives at stake.
On the legal side, the landmark decision from the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade (1973) established a constitutional right to abortion in the US, which has been mostly considered as a noble step forward in the fight for women’s reproductive rights, however, the right has been consistently challenged and chipped away at by pro-life advocates who seek the overturning or limitation of it (Miller, 2023). States have enforced their laws, which have been designed in a different cave, such as mandatory waiting periods and parental consent requirement laws, gestational age limits, and modal ventures for services to ban specific abortion procedures. This collection of laws has led to the notion of a complicated legal terrain whose divorce procedure varies among the different areas of a country.
The high level of combat over the abortion concern has resulted in many drastic incidents, such as the bombing of abortion clinics and the threatening of providers, and there have also been demonstrations and counter-demonstrations. The polarization has brought the parties together, and constructive dialogue on the issue has become difficult. The two sides would naturally be stuck to their positions and not compromise (Miller, 2023). Yet the question remains whether the idea of a different stance – the one that stresses the importance of reaching a compromise between two seemingly irreconcilable positions- can really be feasible. Some claim an intermediate solution between a full identification with a fetus’s potential as a new individual and the right of women over their bodies and their future. This opinion most commonly supports a woman’s right to abortion in cases of rape or incest. These fetal abnormalities are so severe that they threaten the life or health of the mother, or situations where a pregnancy is dangerous to the woman’s life or health. It tends to seek ways to avoid pregnancy, such as sex education, easy access to contraception, and support for mothers and families.
The abortion issue is an ethical question that goes deep into the minds and touches upon the perspectives of many human beings all around the world. Both parties have valid inputs in their argument, although finding a way to see both sides may involve an approach whereby women are understood to have caused concern. Yet, their autonomy and rights have to be respected, and abortion should not be seen as an easy way to escape parenthood or life itself. These factors have necessitated research and dialogue appropriate to the ever-ongoing developmental phases to understand fetal consciousness and viability. Also, studies are necessary for proper knowledge of the family-related assistance and programs to prevent pregnancies while supporting and encouraging couples. Besides that, it could demand a kind of openness to share the views that are grounded in the truth, even if this sometimes means confronting uncomfortable and complex realities and trying to find common ground where it can be. In a society with several beliefs and values, we might never be able to readily address the abortion controversy in a way that pleases everybody. However, let’s push ourselves to look at the situation from the other side’s view, be open-minded, and be committed to developing humane and compassionate ways of solving this controversial issue. We can negotiate this disagreement in a less divisive and confrontational manner.
Blackshaw, B. P. (2020). The impairment argument for the immorality of abortion revisited. Bioethics, 34(2), 211-213. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12698
Kaczor, C. (2022). The ethics of abortion: Women’s rights, human life, and the question of justice. routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003305217
Mackenzie, C. (2020). Abortion and embodiment 1. In Women, medicine, ethics and the law (pp. 73-92). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003073789-5/abortion-embodiment-1-catriona-mackenzie
Miller, C. (2023). Human equality arguments against abortion. Journal of Medical Ethics, 49(8), 569-572. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2022-108572
Roat, O. (2022). Free-Exercise Arguments for the Right to Abortion: Reimagining the Relationship Between Religion and Reproductive Rights. UCLA J. Gender & L., 29, 1. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4100833
Vanderheide, J., Beaton, E. L., & Olsen, A. W. (2021). Making others’ perspectives present: Arguments that listen. English Journal, 110(5), 87-93. https://publicationsncte.org/content/journals/10.58680/ej202131233