Shaping My Views Series - Part 1: Abortion
Shaping My Views - Abortion
I decided to start off this series with the issue of abortion. Not because it is likely first on the list of political issues when it comes to alphabetical order, but because abortion is one of if not the most polarizing issues here in the United States. I was once told that your view on abortion is the deciding factor in what makes you a democrat or republican in this country. While I can't agree with that sentiment, I can understand why abortion could serve as a scapegoat for easily dividing people into two categories.
In order to more fully understand the issue of abortion, I find it paramount to create an accurate definition of what I mean by the term abortion. The best definition that I have found is "the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy." The reason that I choose to go with this definition is that it does not use words with underlying emotional weight. This is a very academic definition and for the purposes of this article, academic is exactly what I am searching for.
With a working definition of the issue, I can finally begin my journey into self discovery when it comes to the issue of abortion. I want to start by saying that I have no experience with abortions whether directly or indirectly as far as I know. Is it possible that somebody I know has had an abortion that I do not know about? Certainly, but I want to say that I do not knowingly have any experience whether with myself or with anyone I know having had or contemplated abortion. I believe this fact both helps and hurts my journey due to the fact that I do not have the empathy that might be present in someone who has gone through the ordeal of abortion, but I also do not have the "what-if" scenarios to play out in my head of whether or not an abortion in my past has helped or hindered me.
The Pros and Cons:
Finding a starting or jumping off point for an issue that is extremely heavy is difficult. A simple pros and cons list might actually be the best way to begin my own personal discussion on the issue. While I realize this will show my naiveté when addressing abortion, I do believe that it will prove useful in breaking through this initial barrier. There are many aspects of abortion that can be seen as either a pro or a con depending upon the situation involved. I have listed these below the pros and cons in a list I will call "Situation Dependent":
Pros of Abortion:
- One Less Mouth To Feed
- Does not hurt the lives of parents/grandparents/others involved in raising the child
- Financial Benefits of not having a child
Cons of Abortion:
- Denial of Life of Child
- Potential Health consequences for mother
Situation Dependent:
- Potentially could be ending the life of the next Einstein or Hitler
- Rape or Incest Issues
- Age of the mother is too young
- Why not adoption?
This is certainly not an exhaustive list, but it gives me a good idea of the issues involved when it comes to abortion.
I will begin with the pros of abortion or what has been deemed the side of being "pro-choice" for all intents and purposes (it is possible to be both pro-choice and anti-abortion as I will discuss later). First off there is the idea that there is one less mouth to feed. Basically, this comes down to there being one less member of society to drain resources that could be used for others. There are countless slippery slope arguments to be made about why this is evidence in favor of abortion, but I will attempt to restrain myself from engaging in those. Second we have the idea that having an abortion relinquishes the need for care for the child from the parents, grandparents, and any others that may be involved in the raising of the child. Once again many would argue with the validity of this as evidence for abortion, but I will certainly be taking into account this strain on others in this thought exercise. Lastly, and what I think may be the most compelling evidence for the pro-choice camp is the financial burden that is lost when a pregnancy is terminated. There is no denying the fact that humans are expensive in terms of feeding, educating, and simply keeping them alive. This financial burden disappears when a pregnancy is terminated and the child is not brought into the world. This can have far reaching affects as not only are immediate families involved in the financial burden of raising a child, but there is now less competition for resources. While there are certainly arguments against all of these perceived benefits, I do see them all as evidence for being pro-choice.
Now we will move on to the cons of abortion or what has been deemed the side of being "pro-life." Once again this is not an exhaustive list and is simply what I have come up with in the short time I have dedicated to dwelling on the subject. We certainly must start with the fact that a child's life is denied. I mentioned earlier the ease of which one can fall into a slippery slope argument on this issue, and I nearly fell into one myself at this point. For all intents and purposes, there is one fewer human being on this earth when an abortion occurs and this is a tragedy. After peeling back the onion a layer, there are potential consequences in terms of the health or the mother. Based on limited research, there are both physical and psychological consequences to aborting a pregnancy that can affect not only the mother, but those around her as well. In terms of physical health consequences, there can be bleeding, irregular menstruation, and potential injury that could lead to sterilization. The psychological consequences can obviously occur in the mother, but can also reach more widely to the father, grandparents, and others in the community. Certainly there are arguments to be made on both sides of the issue, but these pop up as the primary cons to abortion.
Lastly, we have the idea of situational dependent claims, which basically boil down to being a pro in one instance and a con in another simply depending on the situation and context. One of the major arguments (that really isn't an argument as the counterpoint is seemingly built into the evidence) used on both sides of the abortion argument is that the fetus in question could have been the next "insert amazing person we are happy to have in the world" or the next "insert awful person we are unhappy to have in the world." Einstein and Hitler are the common examples, but this is such a statistical unlikelihood that it should not be taken into account for the purposes of my thought experiment. Next we have rape and incest. Now to be sure, I am not attempting to argue that rape or incest can be beneficial in a certain context. I most certainly am not as both rape and incest are horrible tragedies that deserve no place in this world. I am simply saying that fetuses conceived from rape or incest can be argued as to whether abortion is the best option. It will be dependent upon the situation as to whether aborting the pregnancy is the right move or not. Going along with this as it is often the case with rape or incest that a fetus is conceived in a young girl. I would argue that there is going to be a different definition of "young" for each situation, but in my personal opinion, I don't think anyone under the age of 18 is at a point in their life where they should be having children. Yes this is my opinion, but I am entitled to that and welcome comments to the contrary. Whether an abortion is correct in a scenario in which the mother is under this age is going to be dependent upon the situation. Lastly, we have the issue of adoption. Many pro-life supporters use this argument in hopes of persuading pro-choicers. There are countless cases of adoption going horribly wrong, but there are also countless cases of adoption going amazingly well. I'm sure I sound like a broken record, but it is truly dependent upon the situation as to whether abortion or adoption is going to be the correct choice.
Thinking it Through:
Now that I have go through the pros, cons, and situation dependent variables in terms of abortion, it is really time to dig in and work through my view on abortion. I think it starts with relinquishing to the fact that I personally will never be in the situation as to whether or not having an abortion is the right decision for me. Why? I am not a woman and while I believe in technology bringing us into worlds we may never have thought possible, I will never carry a fetus or child in my own body. Understanding this is paramount in deciding my view on abortion. Simply knowing this fact tilts me toward the pro-choice side of the fence due to my propensity for thinking that humans should be allowed to make their own decisions. Who am I to decide for someone other than myself what is exactly right in a given situation? The answer is that I should not be the end decision maker in an abortion decision. I unequivocally believe that the mother should be the final say and her choice is correct regardless of whether I agree with the decision or not.
It would though, be a cop out to simply reserve judgement and to say that since I will never be in the situation, that I should never have a firm stance on whether or not the decision is right. There are obviously certain situations in which abortion is not only the correct decision, but the only decision I think is right. In the case of pregnancy due to rape or incest, abortion to me is entirely correct and I have absolutely no qualms with termination of the pregnancy. I also believe that if there is potential harm to the mother that termination of pregnancy should be allowed regardless of how far along the mother is. Lastly, with current technologies that can test for debilitating diseases in utero, I believe that abortion should be allowed on any grounds of disease that would cause unnecessary stress or financial burden on families. These instances of abortion are more widely accepted, but still incite passionate argument. My hope is that this piece brings civil discussion to light on the issue of abortion.
Before I go further, I would like to discuss the difference between being pro-choice and being pro-abortion (or vice versa, being pro-life and anti-abortion). Being pro-choice in my opinion, has less to do with your view on abortion, and more to do with your view on women's rights to their own bodies. I personally believe that no man, woman, lawmaker, or anyone else for that matter should be able to decide how an individual woman can or cannot act in regards to their own body. Not all people who call themselves pro-choice are proponents of abortion. There is a subtle and nuanced difference between the two terms that is often forgotten. As can be deduced from my previous statement, I would categorize myself as pro-choice regardless of where my stance on abortion lies.
Now that I have figured out that I am pro-choice, it is time to decide whether I am pro- or anti-abortion. Once again, I think the language here is misleading as claiming to be pro-abortion makes it seem like I want all pregnancies to be terminated, which could not be further from the truth. I do believe that a vast majority of pregnancies deserve to be taken to term and that beautiful children should be born into the right situations and are born into the right situations more often than not. Where the linchpin of the decision lies is in the context and situation of the pregnancy and the life after birth.
In regards to the context of the pregnancy, I believe that unplanned pregnancies should be dealt with in a logical and rational manner. I believe the individuals involved need to hash out the potential consequences and potential ramifications of both terminating the pregnancy and seeing it through to birth. I truly believe that this is a decision that needs to be made by the mother and that all discussion of the matter should be informative rather than persuasive. This is likely an impossible thing to ask for, but in a perfect world, this is the way this would work. After the facts have been stated and all evidence given as to the ramifications of both sides of the coin, the mother should be allowed to make her own, now informed, decision.
My View Shaped:
As you can likely tell by the way I have written this article, I am both pro-choice and pro-abortion given the right circumstances. The only situation in which I don't believe abortion should be allowed would be in the case of a rash and uninformed decision being made. In the case of someone with no access to information on the potential ramifications of both abortion and birth, an abortion should not be allowed until information has been granted to that individual. If the pregnant mother decides that her life situation and financial and physical health are not at a point in which she can lovingly care for a child, then I believe an abortion should be allowed as long as information as to both sides of the coin has been given. Based on the evidence provided and my own thinking through of the issue, I believe that abortion should be legal and that every woman should have access to a safe and humane medical procedure if she so chooses.
I do believe that in a perfect world, abortion would never actually be necessary. Couples would use birth control in an effective and safe manner and unwanted pregnancies would cease to exist. I know this is utopian thinking, but it is important nonetheless as each abortion truly is something that should not occur. I still maintain that abortion should and needs to be legal and accessible, but as I said, in a perfect world it would be unnecessary.
-Brandon
PS. As I mention multiple times in my article, discussion is highly encouraged in the comments. Please keep things civil and any personal attacks will be dealt with accordingly. Remember that everyone is entitled to their opinion and whether or not you agree with that opinion is up to you.
Thank you for reading. Please follow @brandonp for upcoming posts directly to your feed.
Hi @brandonp. Nicely written article on a very touchy subject.
I would add a couple more points for consideration that I didn't quite see in your article.
The answer to this question is often touted by pro-life while avoided by pro-choice. I don't personally feel that a sperm or an egg can be considered a life but surely sometime between conception and birth there has to be a point.
For those that think life begins at birth then how can you explain why we are sympathetic to a women who has just experienced a miscarriage and she herself is in emotional distress? It is not because we are in sorrow for the loss of the life within her womb?
Or if a pregnant woman dies in a car accident; do we not express sorrow for a loss of a mother and baby?
Someone has to have kids right? It just happens that only women can. Just think, if the population is 50/50 men/women then each woman would need to have 2 babies just to prevent an extinction of the human race. One to replace her life and one to replace a man's life.
When you consider early life mortality the number is higher still, say perhaps 2.2 or 2.1 babies per woman. Also not all women can conceive so the rate goes higher still.
In Western society we already are reliant on immigration to maintain population levels since our birth rates are well below the 2.x value needed to sustain ourselves. If abortion and low birth rates became as commonplace in the non-Western world as it is here, humanity would die. period.
Anyways, I don't want to start confrontation with anyone. I just wanted to add those two points. I generally support women's rights and basically everyone's rights. I'm not much of an advocate, but I do have my own opinion on the matter and I personally won't change that out of coercion of political correctness.
But safe to say it's not a black and white issue and I'm somewhere in the grey like most people I presume.
Thanks again! :)
It's funny you mention the issue of when life begins because I was very close to including a paragraph about my views on this. I decided that I wanted to exclude this variable as much as possible because I felt it would complicate things by adding the caveat of "at a certain number of weeks, the fetus is considered a human being" since I don't have the necessary research to make a formal decision on that. I do think that it is a little unfair to use the example of a miscarriage because of the fact that a miscarriage typically happens in what we might call a "planned pregnancy" in which abortion was not seen as an option. This is very different in that the woman has decided to go full term with the pregnancy and is then abruptly terminated by no choice of the mother. The same holds true with the car accident example. The different is whether the mother would be planning on giving birth to the child or not.
As far as the fate of humanity, I like your argument and I can see both sides of it. I think it begs a new moral question of whether or not overpopulation is currently an issue though. Part of me thinks yes, but another part thinks no. That may be a question for another article. As far as I can tell though, your math checks out, but I'm sure some would argue that the world is already too crowded and that the human race could use a bit of the proverbial "thinning of the herd."
Thank you for your comment and for being civil. I hope this sparks more discussion on the topic!
Thanks for the response @brandonp.
I understand your counterpoints on my two examples (car accident and miscarriage). I was thinking about this as well.
However the question then becomes; when such a thing occurs are we being sympathetic because,
or
If it's the latter (and we are honest with ourselves) then the mother's intent for choosing to bear the child to birth becomes irrelevant in my opinion.
The reason why is because we've established, at least the belief, that the fetus is alive by our sympathy at it's death.
I think it's impossible to assign the status of alive or not based on the intentions of the mother. It's out of human control. It's nature. It's either alive or not regardless of human will.
That being said, I don't know when to assign life status either and don't envy anyone who attempts such an exercise.
Cheers!
I think we are saddened because of both of the facts you brought up. I think part of the issue comes down to the language we are forced to use to describe life and being alive. It is certainly a complicated issue and attempting to assign a "life status" as you call it is futile until one is actually in the position. The one piece I have contention with is when you say "it's out of human control." Is it really? Human's do control their own ability to have sex and thus control their own ability to become pregnant. Probably splitting hairs at this point, but something I felt I needed to address.
@brandonp I think we both actually agree on a lot. I don't disagree at all with our ability to decide to create a child or to not (ie. have sex and get pregnant). It's not the point I was attempting to communicate.
I only meant to say that once a woman is pregnant, no human can simply will life into the fetus/baby by decree or law. It's either already a life or it isn't.
We just can't collectively agree as a human race on what we choose to believe. But in the end, our choice has no bearing on whether it was or was not a human life after conception.
Thanks again. I appreciate the conversation. :)
Ah I totally understand now. As is often the case with these issues, the nuances really matter. I appreciate the conversation as well!
It is funny that Americans doesn't believe in spanking to instill discipline to a child but killing an innocent blood is OK.
What the state have to do is to institutionalize unwanted children and invest on them and make them a future good citizen since the states can afford it.
They can afford to house millions of criminals, why not children that has a great potential of building a nation.
There's a lot to unpack in your comment.
First off, I don't think it's fair to equate abortion with spanking. One is the denial/ending of a life depending on your view and the other is a short and temporary pain. I think it would be difficult to truly equate the two.
Second, I think it's easy to say that the state can afford to institutionalize unwanted children, but why not deal with the issue in the first place and attempt to remedy the "unwanted" aspect of that instead.
Well I am just seeing a hypocrisy there. Maybe these unwanted babies are just a victim of the capitalistic system the US is known for where the weak loses, in this case, a person's life.
It is a complicated issue I must say to make a remedy for dealing with abortion since the culture aspect is involved where sexual promiscuity is widespread which boils down to morality where it also have to be looked upon. Maybe a long-term education for the public to avoid unwanted pregnancy is one of the key but I think it wwill not completely be solved until abortion clinics are all dissolved.
@cryptopie got you a $0.01 @minnowbooster upgoat, nice! (Image: pixabay.com)
Want a boost? Click here to read more!
@cryptopie got you a $0.01 @minnowbooster upgoat, nice! (Image: pixabay.com)
Want a boost? Click here to read more!