PHI FPX 2000 Assessment 4 Contemporary Social Issues
Capella University
PHI FPX 2000 Ethics
Prof. Name
Date
Contemporary Social Issues: Abortion
Abortion is one of the most controversial current social issues that combines ethical, legal, and medical complexity (Aanmoen, 2023). Behind all the controversy, the debate boils down to the balance between a pregnant woman’s rights and a fetus’s so-called rights. Advocates of abortion rights focus on personal autonomy and claim that only people can decide matters of their own bodies and reproductive life. They, for instance, point to pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, severe fetal abnormalities, or situations where the pregnancy endangers the person’s life as the most critical reasons for access to safe and legal abortion services. Aided by moral and religious reasons on the other hand, those opposed to abortion base their stance on the belief that life begins at conception, and the termination of pregnancy amounts to killing a human being. This has also been reflected in legislation: some regions have made abortion laws strict, while others have played a more liberal hand, allowing more open access. These issues are complicated by differences in healthcare provision, socioeconomic inequalities, and shifting cultural attitudes, making a subject at the root of medicine one of personal and often the most polarizing societal concern. The debate continues to underpin a need for compassionate dialogue and evidence-based policies respecting the wide range of views concerned.
Importance of Abortion from Multiple Viewpoints
The importance of abortion varies greatly depending on the view from which it is regarded. From a medical perspective, abortion is an important healthcare avenue in saving lives where the pregnancy poses a grave threat to the health or life of the pregnant woman (Chervenak et al., 2024). It also offers a safe alternative to illegal or unsafe procedures that have, historically, caused much harm. Therefore, at a social level, the availability of abortion promotes gender equality because individuals can make choices about their reproductive lives, impacting their economic, educational, and personal opportunities. In terms of ethics, well-known standpoints vary—pro-choice advocates focus on the moral importance of autonomy and the right to choose, but pro-life advocates center on the ethical duty for the protection of unborn life. Legally, abortion rights are often tied to broader human rights, with its defenders arguing that any restriction infringes on privacy and bodily integrity. At the same time, opponents seek to extend legal protections to the fetus. These alternate perspectives only underscore how complex an issue abortion is – deeply, profoundly influencing people, families, and societies.
Conflicting Perspectives Regarding Abortion
Abortion is a topic marked by conflicting perspectives that stem from differing moral, ethical, religious, and cultural beliefs (Horner & Campo-Engelstein, 2020). On one side, proponents of abortion rights argue that individuals should have the autonomy to make decisions about their bodies, highlighting the importance of access to safe and legal abortion for personal, medical, and socioeconomic reasons. They also bring up scenarios like pregnant women due to rape or situations where the health of the expectant mother is in danger. On the opposing side, critics of abortion believe it is not the right thing to do morally because they think life is at conception and abortion is essentially killing a human being. Many who belong to this category have beliefs based on religious doctrine or philosophical ideas about the dignity of life. These conflicting opinions are often reflected in acrimonious political and legal debates, with proponents on one side arguing that abortion services should be more accessible and others seeking to limit or ban them entirely. The truth of the matter is that society is divided as much as possible on this issue.
Analysis of Stakeholder’s Interest and Arguments
Through the analysis of stakeholders’ interests and arguments in the abortion debate, it becomes clear that there is a wide range of perspectives shaped by personal ethical, legal, and societal concerns (Schwartzman & Schragger, 2022). Providers of healthcare are usually strong advocates for access to abortion, especially as an essential part of complete medical care and upholding the principles of patient safety and evidence-based practices. Women’s rights organizations emphasize autonomy over bodies and the right to make choices over government interference, relating reproductive choice to issues of gender equality and personal freedom. In turn, religious groups and proponents of the “right to life” often value protection for unborn life, appealing to moral and spiritual perspectives that life begins at conception. Policymakers and legislators tend to be divided on both sides, as individuals support laws that enable safe abortions while others push for restrictions that reflect the moral beliefs of their constituents. Broader societal stakeholders, including educators and employers, are also interested in the issue due to its influence on social stability, workforce participation, and public health outcomes. These varied interests and arguments therefore illustrate the myriad complexity of balancing individual rights, ethical considerations, and societal values of the ongoing discourse surrounding abortion.
Insight from Different Academic Disciplines
Abortion is a multidimensional aspect that can be viewed from different academic spectrums, which helps to gain their perspective (Rye & Underhill, 2020). If seen from a medical standpoint, abortion is treated as a form of healthcare service where it ensures the safety of the physical and mental hygiene of a person in cases of risky pregnancies or anomalies with the fetus. In legal studies, the discussion of abortion takes into account constitutional rights, which range from privacy and bodily autonomy to the implementation of differential laws and policies in regions and their effects on social equity. Philosophy then turns to the question of how the moral status of the fetus is weighed against the rights of the pregnant individual, using theories of personhood and autonomy. Therefore, sociology addresses the social effects of abortion access, including its place in addressing gender disparity and its impact on families, communities, and mobility. Psychologically, the study is on the emotional and psychological outcomes for the individual who has made the choice to or is considering abortion. Finally, economics analyzes how reproductive choices affect an individual’s and the community’s wallet and, from that, how access to abortion would likely change labor force participation and economic security. Together these disciplines lead to an understanding of the intricate facets that surround abortion.
Analysis of Abortion through Deontology
From the deontological perspective, abortion analysis focuses on the moral duties and principles involved rather than the consequences of the action (Ghasem Fardid et al., 2023). Deontology, more specifically put by philosopher Immanuel Kant, involves strong adherence to universal moral laws and to the inherent value of all persons as ends in themselves. Applying this framework, the permissibility of abortion would depend on whether it goes in line with moral duties and respects the inherent dignity of all parties involved.
Those who are anti-abortion may use a deontological argument that harming a fetus serves as a breach of a moral obligation to preserve human life to start at conception. Here, the right to life of the fetus would supersede all circumstances in any case as a universal moral principle against terminating a pregnancy.
In contrast, from a deontological pro-choice perspective, it might be said that there is a moral obligation to act to preserve autonomy and self-determination. This position focuses on the right of the pregnant person to choose over his or her body and life, arguing that compelling someone to remain pregnant against their will violates the inherent worth of the autonomous being. Deontology eventually highlights the conflicting duties to the fetus and to the pregnant individual-which makes the task of applying strict moral rules to this issue all the more complicated.
PHI FPX 2000 Assessment 4 Conclusion
In conclusion, abortion is one of the very complex and polarizing issues that are analyzed and debated in all aspects and disciplines (Crawford & Weible, 2024). The various opinions from the protection of bodily autonomy and gender equality towards the moral and ethical responsibilities toward unborn life highlight the tension between individual rights and societal values. Other disciplines like medicine, law, philosophy, sociology, psychology, and economics bring about different information that puts together a complete view of the issue. Ethical frameworks such as deontology add more depth to the discussion by stressing out duties and principles, showing how impossible it is to be able to reconcile competing moral obligations. This multi-faceted debate leads to a call for respectful dialogue and evidence-based policies that recognize diversity in beliefs as well as the profound influence abortion has on an individual and society as a whole.
PHI FPX 2000 Assessment 4 References
Aanmoen, P. (2023). The abortion debate in Brazil: an analysis of 11 articles related to the abortion debate in Brazil, focusing on the correlation between religious beliefs, especially catholicism and evangelicalism, and opposition to abortion legalization. DIVA. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1806496&dswid=-485
Chervenak, F., McLeod-Sordjan, R., Moreno, J. D., Pollet, S., Bornstein, E., Joachim Dudenhausen, & Grünebaum, A. (2024). The importance of professional responsibility and fetal viability in the management of abortion. Journal of Perinatal Medicine, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2023-0503
Crawford, A. M., & Weible, C. M. (2024). The political polarization over abortion: An analysis of advocacy coalition belief systems. Policy Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-024-09544-7
