Abortion involves the termination of a pregnancy by removing the fetus before it matures. It is done by either taking pills or going through a surgery. Genetics enhance traits in a person. It redirects the human beings’ instincts about how to approach lives. The genetics, however, may cause defects but do not give specific traits. Morals, on the other hand, involve the values that distinguish whatever is wrong or right in the society. It helps us determine whatever is right in our lives. Every person has morals, but they vary from an individual to another. Therefore, there is a difference in how morals and genetics in people affect how we view life. This paper focuses on discussing whether the distinction between moral and genetics in humans provide a sound foundation that a community should permit a woman to choose abortion. It also reflects on how the two support a liberal view.
The distinction between moral and genetics in humans form a sound foundation for the claim that a society should allow a woman to choose an abortion. First, in morals, human beings can distinguish whatever is right and wrong. They can differentiate whatever is evil and whatever upholds the correct behavior. There is a strong connection between morality and the legality of abortion (Kaczor). Most people argue that abortion is morally wrong. Morality depicts abortion as a wrong decision and against humanity. According to morality, taking the life of another person whether born or unborn is wrong. The fetus in the womb has life in it, and it is unethical to remove it before it’s due. There is no justification for a person taking another one’s life even if the circumstances force one to do it.
In morals, people can anticipate the consequences of their actions ethically. The expectation helps a person to establish what will happen after they do what they want by viewing their actions as a means to the purpose they are accomplishing and the results of their actions (Kaczor). Therefore people who want to procure an abortion should contemplate on their behavior and decide whether it will be right to go ahead with the means. Morals provide that people think about what will happen after they accomplish their purpose of ending a life. Through this, they can come up with a decision on whether to go ahead with their plans, thus supporting the liberal view on abortion.
Morals value the life of a human and encourage respect of another person's life. Abortion is viewed as a form of murder in morality. It leads to loss of growing life. All people whether born or unborn equally have a right to life, and no one is allowed to end the life of another person (Kaczor). The moral values such as the responsibility to action and respect for human life are taken seriously even by the liberals who believe that human life is essential. The values influence the decision one makes when it comes to procuring an abortion. The woman contemplating on abortion should keep in mind that the life of someone is vital before making their final decision.
On the other hand, genetics supports abortion. Due to the increased technology, it can detect a baby with defects during prenatal screening (Purdy 105). Therefore, the community gives the pregnant woman the right to choose whether to go ahead with the abortion. Women are free to make a decision if they want a baby with the defects or to end life. The detection can be traumatic to the parents hence they have to make the painful choice after assessment.
In line with genetics, women have the right to choose whether to procure an abortion. Babies with defect have a reduced quality of life where their parents would prefer to terminate their life instead of watching them suffer in their whole life (Purdy 105). Therefore, this prevents the child and the parents from suffering in future when the baby is incapable of handling themselves due to the defects. Abortion is granted in such a case to protect the baby from future problems.
The parents of the child with the defect may be unwilling to bring up children with disabilities. Only the parents know the suffering that comes with raising a baby with disabilities (Purdy 105). Therefore, this forms a foundation that the community must permit the woman to choose whether to procure an abortion. The woman would wish to obtain the abortion to avoid raising such a kid.
Additionally, abortion of babies with genetic defects is always chosen by a couple which is stable and is in search of a baby. The couple is also capable of raising a baby (DeGrazia 415). Therefore, when the woman chooses to abort, the high chances are that she will soon conceive another baby to replace the one whose life has been terminated. Therefore a community should give the women the freedom to choose if they want to keep the pregnancy.
Lastly, a baby born with genetic defects will require the couple to incur many costs to cater to the baby's financial needs. The expenditure may make the woman go through a financial crisis especially when they are not well up. In the case where a woman does not have the money to take the baby to the hospital, the baby may suffer in pain (DeGrazia 418). The baby may also have the Down’s syndrome which may make them suffer in their lifetime as it is easy to manage. Therefore, a woman should be allowed to choose whether to procure an abortion.
The distinction between moral and genetics in humans is legitimate. Genes produce particular traits and defects in the body. Morality, on the other hand, is a behavior that is learned by the person. Genetic defects may affect a person's morality by making them go against what they know is right.
Morality may, on the other hand, support the liberal view on abortion. There is consciousness in what people choose to do hence they are aware of their actions. People are also entitled to reasoning which helps them to come up with solutions that help in getting rid of their problems (Kaczor). There is also, the self-awareness that allows one to determine the situation they are in and the possible solutions for their problems. In morality, people are also able to communicate messages with various details on different topics; thus they can share their problems. Therefore there is liberty on abortion as people choose the actions they believe are the best for them.
Genetic selective abortion supports the liberal view on abortion. It gives the mother the freedom to choose what to do to a fetus that has defects. The women can decide what she feels is right for the baby and her good. The mother decides on procuring an abortion when the baby is diagnosed with defects the prenatal screening (DeGrazia 416). Abortion helps in maintaining the dignity of the unborn who may have suffered in future due to their physical appearance. Genetic selective abortion is done with love from the parents of the unborn. Hence, women should be given the freedom to choose abortion.
Conclusively, the community has different opinions regarding abortion. Some allow it whereas others are against it. In most cases, human morals go against the legalization of abortion. They term it as disrespect to a person's life as everyone has the right to live. Abortion is viewed as going against the community's morals which highly prohibit murder. In genetics, the fetus in the womb is perceived to have abnormalities which may hinder them from living a normal life. The parents may see it as a way of relieving the baby from future suffering. The woman's financial status may also make it impossible for the parent to meet the special needs of the baby hence the need for abortion. Therefore, women should be given the freedom to choose whether to procure an abortion as they understand their bodies better and know what is good for them. The woman’s freedom of choice in reproduction should never be tampered with.
Works Cited
DeGrazia, David. "Creation ethics: reproduction, genetics, and quality of life." Journal of medical ethics 41.5 (2015): 415-416.
Kaczor, Christopher. The ethics of abortion: Women’s rights, human life, and the question of justice. Routledge, 2014.
Purdy, Laura M. "Genetics and reproductive risk." Bioethics: an anthology 40 (2015): 105.
