It is morally permissible to perform an abortion on a defective fetus. However, there needs to be a distinctive description and clarification on the severity of a defection that would warrant an abortion. Without such clarifications, some abortions may fall short of meeting the threshold of a morally acceptable abortion. According to the utilitarian theory, abortion is permissible to avert possible sufferings for women and society. On preventing societal sufferings, utilitarian believes that fetuses born with defects are bound to subject themselves and the society to suffering, thus their termination would be deemed morally acceptable. The theory attempts to clarify permissible defects by enlisting fetuses born without a brain, fetuses with terminal ailments, severely retarded fetuses, or those with severe disabilities. When such fetuses are allowed to be born and live, it will put their lives and society into increased and unnecessary suffering. In such cases, termination of the pregnancy would be morally acceptable.
Some conditions have medical evidence to prove that fetuses born with such ailments may not survive for several days. If such a fetus is delivered and left to live for a few days, they bring increased pain to the parents and families who would have formed a bond for the days lived. Also, the few days lived would be full of pain and suffering for the infants before they expire. Therefore, it becomes morally acceptable when such cases are considered as meeting the threshold for a morally acceptable abortion.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Also, some defects do not guarantee death within a few days after birth but guarantee a lifetime of pain and suffering for the child. Aborting such a fetus is not only morally acceptable but a right to the mother and the unborn child. If the fetus is allowed to live, the mother and close family members are subjected to mental suffering and financial challenges at all times that their child suffers. Infants born with lifetime pain are also put to go through a life that is not of the desired quality, thus not worth living. Allowing such abortions is similar to the right to die. In the same breadth that terminally ill and suffering patients can request and receive euthanasia, expectant mothers should also give fetuses their right to die to avert pain and suffering. Therefore, abortions to prevent lifetime pain and suffering are morally right.
Lastly, abortions on minor defects such as cleft lip are not justified. A left clip is a minor defect that forms between the fourth to seventh weeks of pregnancy. During the development of a baby, body tissues from the left and right side of the head grow as they move towards the center of the face. The process completes when tissues from both sides join at the lips to form all facial features. In some incidences, the joining of the tissues does not complete, leaving an opening on the upper lip. This can be in the form of a small slit. Children born with this condition and who do not seek medication still lead a quality life with no significant suffering. Due to this reason, it is morally unacceptable to consider the left clip as a defect that meets the abortion threshold. Also, diagnosis and treatment of left clip through surgery have a high rate of positive patient outcomes that significantly improve children's quality of life.
In conclusion, no abortion performed on minor defects such as the left clip can be justified. Policymakers should consider the loophole in the law that allows the termination of pregnancies due to minor defects. All major defects that meet the threshold for an acceptable abortion should be listed to avoid misuse of the law in carrying out morally unacceptable abortions.
