Is it wrong to terminate a pregnancy? A conservative argument

New homework is at the tab above

Eric Olson's Two Questions (powerpoint)

1. When did I begin to exist?
2. When I did I begin to be a person?

MORE BELOW



(A)  Olson 

1. I began to exist almost as early as conception 
2. I began to be a person later on (possibly around 24 weeks, when consciousness starts) 

• based on biological continuity account of personal identity; also motivated by objection to (B)
• I don't begin to exist until day 5 because before then there's just a collection of cells, not a unified organism
• 
  

•  I am a person through only some of my lifespan, like I am a child only through some of my lifespan 
• When do I stop existing on the biological continuity view?  (Marlise Munoz case)

(B)  Others 

1. I began to exist when consciousness started (around 24 weeks)
2. I began to be a person at the same time

• based on psychological continuity account of personal identity 
• I am a person throughout all of my lifespan
• When do I stop existing?

(C)  John Finnis

• Catholic perspective; he says: reason, not revelation

1. I began to exist when egg was fertilized.  (different answer if I was an identical twin)
2. I began to be a person when I began to exist.

• "Most people begin at fertilization" (p. 17)   Why think that entity is already a person? 
•  A person is any "living, whole human individual" (p. 17) because that's common sense and nobody has shown otherwise; there is a "living, whole human individual" starting with the zygote
• If x is ever a person then x is always a person (disagrees with Olson)

 "Any entity which, remaining the same individual, will develop into a paradigmatic instance of a substantial kind already is an instance of that kind. The one-cell human organism originating with the substantial change which occurs upon the penetration of a human ovum by a human sperm typically develops, as one and the same individual, in a paradigmatic instance of the rational bodily person, the human person; in every such case, therefore, it is already an actual instance of a the human person." (p. 19)

 TWINS

•  Amos and Andy can't be identical to the same zygote, or they'd be identical to each other!
• Zygote is parent of the first two cells, which are parents, of the next, etc.  So there is a person, starting at conception, but it is not the same person as the two who are eventually born.

ETHICS

Basic argument -- page 17

(1) If a zygote/embryo/fetus is a person, then every abortion* is wrong [based on moral principles of "justice and non-maleficence"].
(2) A zygote/embryo/fetus is a person.
(C) Every abortion is wrong.

* An abortion is any procedure carried out with the intention of killing a fetus. 

Easy cases (pregnancy not dangerous or life-threatening)

Hard cases  (pregnancy is dangerous or life-threatening to mother)

1. Mother has ectopic pregnancy (in fallopian tube). May doctors perform surgery to remove fallopian tube?
2. Father likely to kill daughter if pregnancy is found out.  May doctors perform abortion?
3. Mother has been raped.  May she take "Plan B" at hospital?

 Key principles

1. Direct, intentional killing of innocent is wrong.  "This moral norm excludes even the choice to kill one innocent person as a means of saving another or others, or even as a means of preventing the murder of another or others." (p. 20)
2. Mother and fetus are equals, with same right to life
3. Fetus is not an "intruder, predator, or aggressor" (pg. 20) (So abortion is not "self defense.")
4. Acts that bring about death can be permissible, if death is only a foreseeable side-effect of a procedure;  doctor must not intentionally kill one individual as a means of saving another.
5. Not all indirect (i.e. unintended) killings are permissible--often there is a better way.

What about the three cases?