Thinking Critically About Abortion

This book introduces readers to the many arguments and controversies concerning abortion. While it argues for ethical and legal positions on the issues, it focuses on how to think about the issues, not just what to think about them. It is an ideal resource to improve your understanding of what people think, why they think that and whether their (and your) arguments are good or bad, and why. It's ideal for classroom use, discussion groups, organizational learning, and personal reading. From the Preface To many people, abortion is an issue for which discussions and debates are frustrating and fruitless: it seems like no progress will ever be made towards any understanding, much less resolution or even compromise. Judgments like these, however, are premature because some basic techniques from critical thinking, such as carefully defining words and testing definitions, stating the full structure of arguments so each step of the reasoning can be examined, and comparing the strengths and weaknesses of different explanations can help us make progress towards these goals. When emotions run high, we sometimes need to step back and use a passion for calm, cool, critical thinking. This helps us better understand the positions and arguments of people who see things differently from us, as well as our own positions and arguments. And we can use critical thinking skills help to try to figure out which positions are best, in terms of being supported by good arguments: after all, we might have much to learn from other people, sometimes that our own views should change, for the better. Here we use basic critical thinking skills to argue that abortion is typically not morally wrong. We begin with less morally-controversial claims: adults, children and babies are wrong to kill and wrong to kill, fundamentally, because they, we, are conscious, aware and have feelings. We argue that since early fetuses entirely lack these characteristics, they are not inherently wrong to kill and so most abortions are not morally wrong, since most abortions are done early in pregnancy, before consciousness and feeling develop in the fetus. Furthermore, since the right to life is not the right to someone else’s body, fetuses might not have the right to the pregnant woman’s body—which she has the right to—and so she has the right to not allow the fetus use of her body. This further justifies abortion, at least until technology allows for the removal of fetuses to other wombs. Since morally permissible actions should be legal, abortions should be legal: it is an injustice to criminalize actions that are not wrong. In the course of arguing for these claims, we: 1. discuss how to best define abortion; 2. dismiss many common “question-begging” arguments that merely assume their conclusions, instead of giving genuine reasons for them; 3. refute some often-heard “everyday arguments” about abortion, on all sides; 4. explain why the most influential philosophical arguments against abortion are unsuccessful; 5. provide some positive arguments that at least early abortions are not wrong; 6. briefly discuss the ethics and legality of later abortions, and more. This essay is not a “how to win an argument” piece or a tract or any kind of apologetics. It is not designed to help anyone “win” debates: everybody “wins” on this issue when we calmly and respectfully engage arguments with care, charity, honesty and humility. This book is merely a reasoned, systematic introduction to the issues that we hope models these skills and virtues. Its discussion should not be taken as absolute “proof” of anything: much more needs to be understood and carefully discussed—always.

There are few issues as divisive and emotionally charged as abortion. Through a narrative-driven pro/con format¿supported by relevant facts, quotes, anecdotes, and full-color illustrations¿this title examines issues related to abortion. Topics include: Is a Fetus a Person with a Right to Life? Is Abortion Harmful to Women? Is Abortion Harmful to Society? Are Laws Regulating Abortion Adequate?

A Critical Introduction to the Ethics of Abortion addresses some of the most prominent and influential arguments to the abortion debate. These include the Being a Person verses Functioning as a Person Argument, women's rights vis-à-vis the rights of the foetus, personhood as an essentially contested concept, and a virtue ethics approach. Also covered are central bioethical issues concerning prenatal screening, stem cell research and cloning. Based on a critical assessment of the evidence, the book offers an impartial view and draws on the importance of critical thinking and the logic of argumentation. Providing an overview of the legal history of abortion in the United States, it discusses five of the most influential Supreme Court cases on abortion law during the past fifty years and examines the current state of abortion law, politics and the main trends. Presenting a balance between ethical concepts, views and arguments, A Critical Introduction to the Ethics of Abortion is an up-to-date introduction to the choice of abortion illustrating the importance of evidence, clear thinking and good arguments for supporting one's ethical beliefs.

Most arguments for or against abortion focus on one question: is the fetus a person? In this provocative and important book, David Boonin defends the claim that even if the fetus is a person with the same right to life you and I have, abortion should still be legal, and most current restrictions on abortion should be abolished. Beyond Roe points to a key legal precedent: McFall v. Shimp. In 1978, an ailing Robert McFall sued his cousin, David Shimp, asking the court to order Shimp to provide McFall with the bone marrow he needed. The court ruled in Shimp's favor and McFall soon died. Boonin extracts a compelling lesson from the case of McFall v. Shimp--that having a right to life does not give a person the right to use another person's body even if they need to use that person's body to go on living-and he uses this principle to support his claim that abortion should be legal and far less restricted than it currently is, regardless of whether the fetus is a person. By taking the analysis of the right to life that Judith Jarvis Thomson pioneered in a moral context and applying it in a legal context in this novel way, Boonin offers a fresh perspective that is grounded in assumptions that should be accepted by both sides of the abortion debate. Written in a lively, conversational style, and offering a case study of the value of reason in analyzing complex social issues, Beyond Roe will be of interest to students and scholars in a variety of fields, and to anyone interested in the debate over whether government should restrict or prohibit abortion.

Winner of the NCTE George Orwell Award for Distinguished Contribution to Honesty and Clarity in Public Language Although Roe v. Wade identified abortion as a constitutional right in1973, it still bears stigma--a proverbial scarlet A. Millions of Americans have participated in or benefited from an abortion, but few want to reveal that they have done so. Approximately one in five pregnancies in the US ends in abortion. Why is something so common, which has been legal so long, still a source of shame and secrecy? Why is it so regularly debated by politicians, and so seldom divulged from friend to friend? This book explores the personal stigma that prevents many from sharing their abortion experiences with friends and family in private conversation, and the structural stigma that keeps it that way. In public discussion, both proponents and opponents of abortion's legality tend to focus on extraordinary cases. This tendency keeps the national debate polarized and contentious, and keeps our focus on the cases that occur the least. Professor Katie Watson focuses instead on the cases that happen the most, which she calls "ordinary abortion." Scarlet A gives the reflective reader a more accurate impression of what the majority of American abortion practice really looks like. It explains how our silence around private experience has distorted public opinion, and how including both ordinary abortion and abortion ethics could make our public exchanges more fruitful. In Scarlet A, Watson wisely and respectfully navigates one of the most divisive topics in contemporary life. This book explains the law of abortion, challenges the toxic politics that make it a public football and private secret, offers tools for more productive private exchanges, and leads the way to a more robust public discussion of abortion ethics. Scarlet A combines storytelling and statistics to bring the story of ordinary abortion out of the shadows, painting a rich, rarely seen picture of how patients and doctors currently think and act, and ultimately inviting readers to tell their own stories and draw their own conclusions. The paperback edition includes a new preface by the author addressing new cultural developments in abortion discourse and new legal threats to reproductive rights, and updated statistics throughout.

Endorsements "Discussions on abortion often degenerate quickly into personal attacks and our culture is quick to supply us with a set of labels to encourage those attacks: anti-choice, pro-abortion, and others. Is it possible to discuss an issue this contentious in a way that critiques viewpoints while showing kindness and respect to those who hold them? Hendrik van der Breggen has shown the way in this book. Not only is it clear and readable, it is fair to all positions. Most importantly, he avoids straw man fallacies which are so common in writings on divisive and contentious issues. If you are looking for a book both to help you understand both sides in the ongoing abortion disputes of our culture and also to develop thoughtful responses for your own discussions with others, this will be an important book for you." -Paul Chamberlain, PhD, Professor of Ethics and Leadership, Director of the Institute for Christian Apologetics, Trinity Western University, author of Talking About Good And Bad Without Getting Ugly: A Guide To Moral Persuasion (InterVarsity Press) "What a refreshing read! Dr. van der Breggen writes in a way that is easy to understand even for those who have never studied philosophy. The abortion debate is so tangled up in politics and slogans that reason gets left out of the discussion. This book approaches the overused and underthought arguments from a place of logic, allowing the reader to look again at what it means to be a member of the human race. I also found it refreshing that he is able to remove both politics and religion from the discussion around abortion. I highly recommend this book to anyone who thinks they already understand the abortion arguments circling through social media." -Roger Gingerich, MD, Family Physician, former Chairman of the Board, Providence University College and Seminary, former Executive Director of Christian Medical and Dental Association of Canada "This is the clearest and most thorough summary of standard (plus many non-standard but important) pro-choice arguments and of sound pro-life replies to them that I have read. Van der Breggen is fair, patient, and non-abrasive to the pro-choice arguments he refutes. His counter-arguments are cogent, succinct, and intelligible. This will be a must-read for anyone seriously interested in the topic, and will make a great text for applied ethics, bioethics, or introductory ethics classes." -Patrick Lee, PhD, Professor of Philosophy, Director of the Center for Bioethics, Franciscan University of Steubenville "I thoroughly enjoyed Untangling Popular Pro-Choice Arguments. Hendrik van der Breggen addresses the most common challenges to the pro-life position and offers brief and well-researched responses. ... Whether you are new to this issue, or have been studying it for years like me, you will benefit greatly from reading and studying Dr. van der Breggen's book." -Sean McDowell, PhD, Associate Professor of Apologetics, Biola University "Professor van der Breggen makes a valuable contribution to the abortion debate in systematically identifying the arguments used by pro-choice advocates to justify and promote women's access to abortion and seeking to refute each of them. People on both sides of the debate, whether pro-life or pro-choice, will agree with some of van der Breggen's arguments and disagree with others, but we will all be forced to analyse more precisely, whether our stance is ethical and justified. In short, whatever our position on abortion this book merits reading." -Margaret Somerville, AM, FRSC, DCL, Professor of Bioethics, Affiliate of the Institute for Ethics and Society, University of Notre Dame Australia About the author HENDRIK VAN DER BREGGEN, PhD (University of Waterloo), is a retired philosophy professor (formerly at Providence University College, Manitoba, Canada).

How can someone who condemns hunting, animal farming, and animal experimentation also favor legal abortion, which is the deliberate destruction of a human fetus? The authors of Beating Hearts aim to reconcile this apparent conflict and examine the surprisingly similar strategic and tactical questions faced by activists in the pro-life and animal rights movements. Beating Hearts maintains that sentience, or the ability to have subjective experiences, grounds a being's entitlement to moral concern. The authors argue that nearly all human exploitation of animals is unjustified. Early abortions do not contradict the sentience principle because they precede fetal sentience, and Beating Hearts explains why the mere potential for sentience does not create moral entitlements. Late abortions do raise serious moral questions, but forcing a woman to carry a child to term is problematic as a form of gender-based exploitation. These ethical explorations lead to a wider discussion of the strategies deployed by the pro-life and animal rights movements. Should legal reforms precede or follow attitudinal changes? Do gory images win over or alienate supporters? Is violence ever principled? By probing the connections between debates about abortion and animal rights, Beating Hearts uses each highly contested set of questions to shed light on the other.

The abortion debate in the United States is confused. Ratings-driven media coverage highlights extreme views and creates the illusion that we are stuck in a hopeless stalemate. In this book Charles Camosy argues that our polarized public discourse hides the fact that most Americans actually agree on the major issues at stake in abortion morality and law. Unpacking the complexity of the abortion issue, Camosy shows that placing oneself on either side of the typical polarizations -- pro-life vs. pro-choice, liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican -- only serves to further confuse the debate and limits our ability to have fruitful dialogue. Camosy then proposes a new public policy that he believes is consistent with the beliefs of the broad majority of Americans and supported by the best ideas and arguments about abortion from both secular and religious sources.