Ethical Dilemma on Abortion

Remember do not fix the introductory paragraph alone, carefully check all paragraphs and fix errors and the reference page.

Ethical Dilemma on Abortion

Introduction Comment by Rose Loiacono: If you intend to use this as a heading, it must be centered

Abortion was made legal in 1973, but the topic is still a point of controversy globally, especially in nursing. The focal ethical concern in abortion is about the moral standing of the embryo and fetus. Opinions on the controversy vary, ranging from the notion that a fetus passes as a human being with complete moral standing and a right to conception to those ideas that a fetus does not have any rights even though biologically it can be regarded as a human. Moral philosophers from different standpoints provided nuanced evaluations of the abortion issue above the typical political breakdowns. In 1973, the supreme court in the United States constructed its findings on the legitimate right to have an abortion on two viable factors. These factors include the right to privacy of the mother and the legal status of the fetus. In 2007, the supreme court maintained a law that President Bush had signed opposing a type of abortion called intact dilation and extraction. In addition, there is no health exemption for this. In 2016, the supreme court governed that states cannot have restrictions on abortion amenities delivery create undue challenges for women in quest of an abortion. Comment by Rose Loiacono: Did you know this year before you began this paper? You must cite Comment by Rose Loiacono: is a human being Comment by Rose Loiacono: What does this mean? Comment by Rose Loiacono: This sentence is confusing Comment by Rose Loiacono: decision Comment by Rose Loiacono: This sentence doesn’t make sense either These facts must be cited.

In spite of the law ruled by the Supreme court in 1973, stating women have the freedom to decide about terminating their pregnancies, abortion runs one of the most emotionally charged and divisive issues in the world. One end of the debate regards abortion as murder, a heinous and despicable act. In contrast, the other end considers the attempt to stop women from their right to decide on their reproductive health as a abuse of their right to privacy and bodily independence. The chief query in the abortion debate surrounds the embryo’s moral debate is the standing of the embryo or fetus. Suppose the fetus counts as a human being, with a similar right to life as any other human being. In that case, abortion cannot be justified because it is not a moral justification to murder children because of several issues such as being unwanted disabled, or illegitimate. On the other hand, there is the side on whether pregnant men are obligated to continue gestating the fetus. Comment by Rose Loiacono: The Supreme Court delivers a decision based on the law and the constitution Comment by Rose Loiacono: continues to be Comment by Rose Loiacono: surrounding Comment by Rose Loiacono: status Comment by Rose Loiacono: This sentence is confusing…please rewrite Comment by Rose Loiacono: Men? Be more concise and correct your errors Comment by Rose Loiacono: Why is this an ethical nursing dilemma?

Ethical dimensions

The ethical dimensions surrounding abortion exist in three views: conservative, liberal, and moderate, all of which are drawn from science and critical discerning. Conservatives view the fetus as a human being who has rights as another human being delivered from the beginning of pregnancy and onwards (Berer, 2017). Conservative groups include the catholic church. The catholic church contemplates the fetus as a human being with complete rights even before pregnancy, occurring during the embryo implantation on the uterus. Therefore, according to the church, the embryo counts as a human being from conception. This is for the reason that, at conception, the embryo gets its distinct genetic code, dissimilar from even its father and mother.

Although the conservative side acknowledges that the fetus grows through many dramatic variations during the pregnancy period, they do not recognize that the changes are pertinent to moral standing. They contend that there is no definite phase of development where it can be agreed that now there is a human being, where that was not said in a week or a month. However, Don Marquis gave a secular abortion argument in 1989 that varies from the traditional conservative view. It is not founded on the fetus being a human being there to avoid speciesism charges. Marquis argued that abortion is morally erroneous for a similar reason murdering anyone is wrong: killing derives individuals of a valued future. However, McMahan denies this argument claiming that human beings are fundamentally personified minds and not organisms. In McMahan's opinion, human lives do oy begin until our organisms become sentient, somewhere in the second semester. In this view, early abortion does not put to death an individual with a future like other human beings. Instead, it prevents the individual from coming to life in a similar way that contraception does.

Liberals, inclining Mary Anne Warren, acknowledge that a fetus is biologically considered human. However, they refute that biological humanity is sufficient or essential for personhood and a right to life. They argue that membership of species is a basis for moral standing and upholds that it is considered wrong to kill persons, not humans. Persons denote beings depicting psychological traits such as consciousness, rational thoughts, and the use of language. Judith Thompson in 1971 argued differently, stating that even if a fetus were given personhood, this could not calm the abortion morality issue because the right to life of the fetus does not give it a right to use the body of the pregnant woman (Block, Wirth, & Butt, 2018). According to her, no one had the right to use an individual’s body except themselves. She argues that whether women are morally obligated to let a fetus endure in their bodies is a distinct issue from whether the fetus is a human with the right to life and hinges on the sacrifice or burden the fetus enforces on the pregnant woman. Additionally, Margret Little in 2003 contended that while abortion is considered murder, it is not essentially moral. Pregnant women are not strangers to their fetuses because they are biologically related. She, therefore, argues that the purpose women would choose abortion is that they think it is wrong to bear a child to whom they are incapable of being good mothers.

Moderates or gradualists, like liberals, acknowledge that zygotes are not human persons, but they agree with conservatives that late-gestation fetuses are virtually similar to born infants. They, therefore, think early abortions are honorably better than late ones, and the motives for having these apportions should get stronger as pregnancy advances. This is a reason that can validate early abortions, including not wanting to be converted to mothers but would not validate abortion in the seventh month.

Relevance to nursing

Abortion cases are similar to all other issues in nursing care. Nurses are ethically obligated to provide the most outstanding care decipherable without judging how right or wrong the patient’s behavior and conduct are (Birchley, 2021). Several staff members might believe that abortion is wrong. This personal belief is complimented in many individuals by their religious system of beliefs. Nurses have different opinions about abortion, but since they are health professionals whose opinions are sought, they must comprehend why they hold particular views. Nurses must arrive at a point of view through logic and rationality.

The decision of nurses to participate in abortion is not essential since their most important function is to counsel accordingly and help n ethical decision-making while respecting the choices their patients make. Effective counseling involves empathy and respect for human rights while unconditionally accepting their patients. Making ethical decisions by nurses includes making critical decisions. Nurses are obligated to provide the best care of patients despite their own beliefs about abortion or keeping the pregnancies. Nursing administrators should, however, consider the principles of their nurses. For example, nurses with a strong religious belief that abortion is wrong should not be posted to abortion units; instead, those who do not have a moral stance should handle such cases.

Analysis of relevant principles and theories

There are four principles in healthcare governing human behavior and providing insights on abortion. These include beneficence, autonomy, justice, and non-maleficence. Autonomy denotes the right to make one’s choices within the moral possibilities’ spectrum. The respect for autonomous human choices has a solid standing in secular morality. Autonomy applies where the mother had the right to choose to abort or not.

On the other hand, beneficence is the principle requiring that individuals respect each other by proactively contributing to their welfare (Campbell, & Morris, 2017). This is related to women and the issue of their unwanted babies. When a woman is in an undesirable situation, she can benefit from caring, compassion, empathy, and psychological encouragement, adjusting her stressful circumstances while seeking and obtaining a mutually beneficial solution, not just abortion.

Non-maleficence is a principle imposing to, above all, act in no harm to other humans. If this principle is applied to abortions in which there are no extenuating circumstances, it would therefore not be morally supportive of abortion. The principle ought to emphasize that pregnant women should not be discriminated against or discredited because of their unwanted pregnancy or choice to abort. Justice focuses on achieving fairness among individuals when there is loss or near loss of equity. Concerning the continuation of pregnancy, justice is generally served if the mother and child survive and live healthy and productive lives. Concerning abortion, however, the achievement of justice is challenging to define and can be one-sided. The mother continues to live while the offspring dies. Other fundamental principles can be articulated. They include allowing the maximized quantity of basic liberty ad permitting inequalities in primary social goods only in the instance that they benefit all.

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that assesses abortion as an opinion of utility and endorses the maximum wellbeing in society. The evident strength in this theory relative to abortion is that there is no worth placed on human life. Utilitarianism prefers to judge its case on its merit (Nikooie Nejad, 2018). This means that abortion would be left to the mother and the impacts of abortion on her life. This includes situations including financial instability, rape, abnormality discovered on the fetus, and any other severe circumstances that can be considered under the utilitarian view.

The deontology points of view, including Kant, involve telling the truth, and that is all morals are related universally. On the other hand, teleology endorses ends that satisfy the means (Benlahcene, et al., 2018). Before taking the Kantian point of view, it is essential to determine the point at which life starts. If an individual believes that life begins at conception, then abortion would be immoral and wrong at any stage during the entire gestation period. If an individual believes life starts when the first heartbeat is registered, then abortion would be considered morally wrong at any point from that instance. Individuals seeking to channel themselves into the ethical point of view, either teleological or deontological, must consider their own opinion on arguments such as when life begins, and if it is wrong to kill an innocent being, therefore wring to kill an innocent zygote. Once this point of view has been established, one can form a point of view. Deontology, in general, believes that every moment of human existence, every deed or action those human beings accomplish, can be seen as moral or immoral concerning the principles underlying human behavior.

Personal response

In my perspective, abortion is morally wrong but can be exempted in some situations. In my opinion, similar to other human beings, fetuses have a right to life, and it is wrong to deprive them of this right. They have a future like ours, and if the circumstances can be avoided, then it is wrong for pregnant women to terminate their pregnancies. Killing a fetus is like ending a life that has already been born, and mothers should make rational decisions before deciding on whether to keep or terminate a pregnancy.

Therefore, I take the conservationist perspective about the dilemma related to abortion. In some instances, however, I think that it is acceptable for women to have abortions. These instances, such as therapeutic abortion in which there is suspicion that either the woman or the child may have a serious health problem and therefore such a decision has to be made, are understandable. As a nurse professional, however, I am obligated to respect the decisions f my patients without imposing my own.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the ethical dilemma has existed in the world for numerous years despite the ruling that women have a right to decide about terminating their pregnancies in the supreme court. However, some sides argue that fetuses have the right to life and it is ethically wrong to kill them, while others argue against this notion. Nurses are ethically obligated to respect their patients' decisions concerning abortion even though they differ from their own. Therefore, everybody and their perspectives of whether abortion is morally right or wrong.

References

Benlahcene, A., Zainuddin, R. B., Syakiran, N., & Ismail, A. B. (2018). A Narrative Review of Ethics Theories: Teleological & Deontological Ethics. Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 23(1), 31-32.

Berer, M. (2017). Abortion law and policy around the world: in search of decriminalization. Health and human rights, 19(1), 13.

Birchley, G. (2021). The theorization of ‘best interests’ in bioethical accounts of decision-making. BMC medical ethics, 22(1), 1-18.

Block, W. E., Wirth, H. E., & Butt, J. A. (2018). Judith Jarvis Thomson on abortion; a libertarian perspective. DePaul Journal of Health Care Law, 19(1), 3.

Campbell, R., & Morris, M. (2017). Complicating narratives: Defining and deconstructing ethical challenges in community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 60(3-4), 491-501.

Nikooie Nejad, L. (2018). The Ethical Study of Abortion from Peter Singers View. Iranian Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, 11(1), 417-427. Comment by Rose Loiacono: You must fix the many errors in APA found on this page This was not cited in the body of your assignment as required