“I felt her moving and I couldn’t go through with it. I couldn’t take her life.” The old woman’s eyes teared up as she began to tell the story of her daughter’s controversial birth. As enemies of the state in the communist, third world country of Albania, her family could barely afford the two children they already had, let alone a new baby. The emotional and financial burden of having a child seemed to outweigh any benefit. She was strongly encouraged to set up an appointment to terminate the pregnancy. However, a few days before the procedure, she felt her unborn child’s kick inside of her, and conviction overcame her. She kept the child, who would later become my mother. While my grandmother’s story took place almost fifty years ago, the abortion rights argument is highly controversial because of the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling. My grandmother’s story brings up some of the biggest points in the debate. Someone who supports abortion might ask, “if the fetus is dependent on the mother, why would it be wrong for a mother to prioritize her life and well-being?” Likewise, abortion is the merciful solution if a child would grow up in an adverse environment. While I agree that there are many good points to be made on the mother’s side, abortion is immoral even when a child may inconvenience the mother. Similarly, there is benefit to giving a child the chance to live even if they are born into adversity. This matters because tackling these misconceptions can result in opposing sides making progress and finding common ground in the abortion rights debate.
One of the biggest disagreements surrounding the abortion argument is the mother’s right to choose because the fetus is dependent on her body. My grandmother, who had minimal knowledge of embryology and philosophy, believed at three months pregnant that her unborn baby held unique personhood. However, Mary Anne Warren, a pro-choice writer and philosopher, holds that a fetus does not deserve the same rights as a person. A fetus does not have the same consciousness, reasoning, and self-motivated activity as a developed person; therefore, it is not an independent human. This supports the belief that a mother has the right to choose if the fetus inconveniences her. Why should a clump of cells determine the outcome of a woman’s life? When personhood is removed from the argument, there is a viable case for abortion when it troubles the mother. With this thinking, the termination of a pregnancy is morally acceptable when financial, emotional and physical stress are inflicted on the mother due to the dependency of the fetus.
Why was my grandmother convicted by the life inside of her? After all, everyone reminded her that a baby would bring unnecessary stress into her life. Even she understood how difficult raising the child would be. Don Marquis’s words counter Warren’s position. He states that “The term ‘person’ is typically defined in terms of psychological characteristics…The pro-choicer is left with the problem of explaining why psychological characteristics should make a moral difference.” I would add to Marquis’s points by responding that a toddler is still dependent on his parents. A young child’s consciousness and reasoning are barely formed, similar to a fetus or embryo. Similarly, a person with a brain injury or mental disability might lack some of the psychological characteristics that Warren presents, but it is also wrong to end their life because they do not meet those criteria. It is morally wrong to end the life of a toddler when his life inconveniences his mother even though he is not independent. In fact, there are laws in place to prevent parents from neglecting their dependent children. The major differences between a toddler and a fetus are geographical location and age. Emotional and financial stress do not make it morally right to end the life of a toddler. Therefore, it is wrong to end the life of a fetus based on this criteria.
Despite this, I will acknowledge that a case could be made to spare a mother’s life due to medical emergencies. Abortion might be morally acceptable only in cases where the mother’s life is in immediate danger. One of my family friends received an abortion procedure to save her life during a miscarriage. Her child still had a heartbeat, but my friend was hemorrhaging and was on the brink of death. She had to make the choice to save one life instead of losing two. Because her life was in imminent danger, her abortion might not be morally wrong. However, most pregnancy emergencies, unlike hers, happen in the third trimester. In these cases, a premature delivery is often a viable option instead of abortion. Both lives could be saved instead of one.
Furthering the argument that abortion is morally acceptable, many people who support abortion believe that if a child is born into a disadvantageous position, abortion is a compassionate solution. Mary Anne Warren states, “The mistaken belief that infanticide is always tantamount to murder is responsible for a great deal of unnecessary suffering, not just on the part of infants which are made to endure needlessly prolonged and painful deaths, but also on the part of parents, nurses, and other involved persons, who must watch infants suffering needlessly, helpless to end that suffering in the most humane way.” Although she acknowledges that her view on these issues might be seen as shocking, she stands by her words. She believes that infanticide is not always morally wrong. In some cases, especially when the infant is sick or suffering, it is humane. This same reasoning could also be applied to children in need of adoption and foster care. If a child is not wanted, why should a mother be forced to carry and give birth to it?
Warren is mistaken because she overlooks the people who are directly affected by abortion. My own mother is proof that Warren’s kind of thinking is disputable. Everything about the situation she was born into pointed to a life of suffering and poverty. Most families stopped having children after they had a boy because they were considered more valuable than girls. Because her parents already had the daughter and son they wanted, another baby girl was a curse. She was initially an unwanted child. Even after her contested birth, her life was difficult, proving that the family and friends who supported my grandmother’s abortion procedure were right about the difficulty of the situation. She was denied the right to higher education because of her family’s social status. Despite all of this, she fought for the life she believed she could have and ended up providing for her family in a time of great need. When they could see no hope, the unwanted child saved them. My mother now speaks up about her life experiences to show people that the situation someone is born into does not determine their worth. In spite of the struggles she experienced, my mother loves her life. People born into wealth and stability are not the only people worthy of life. Julian Assele, who also grew up in extreme poverty, writes in an article for Yale News, “It’s easy for us, the living, to say that aborting children is an act of mercy. But it’s not. It is society’s justification for the erasure of the most vulnerable. My foster brothers and sisters — people who have felt so much pain and witnessed so much horror — love life the most.” Just like my mother, Assele is proof that no one can predict how a life will turn out, and it is harmful to decide who does and does not deserve the right to life.
Although some philosophers like Warren present valid arguments against the belief that personhood begins in the womb, I believe that evidence favors the other side. Ultimately, I believe that abortion is immoral regarding the claim that dependence on the mother makes abortion justifiable. Just as a toddler or an elderly person should not be penalized for being dependent, a fetus should not be penalized just because of geographical and developmental differences. Similarly, by appealing to compassion, those who support abortion bring up the fear of children ending up in foster care. Because of her difficult situation, my grandmother came very close to killing my mother, who ended up blessing many people in her life. Her life, though initially unwanted, has been a gift. Through my mother’s story, I have learned that the misconceptions about abortion are hurting society, especially the voiceless and vulnerable. Because abortion is so polarizing in politics, it is easy to be strongly on one side of the issue. However, it is our duty to find common ground and speak up for those in need.
Written by Hannah Davis
Photo thanks to Maria Oswalt on Unsplash