Christians believe that all human life is precious, regardless of the conditions that may affect the human life in question. Virtue ethical theories are very much applicable to the case study in point. The Christian perspective of life is in tandem with the deontology ethics, which perceives any form of killing or termination of human life, regardless of the circumstances to be wrong. According to this theory, each and every human life has value. Deontologists usually question the act more than the consequences (Ainley, 2017). Someone planning to terminate another person’s life may be asked a question regarding whether they want to be the ones to be held responsible for committing murder. Christians view any form of life as God’s will and purpose, and that everyone is made in the image and likeness of God. Therefore, if everyone is an image of God, then they have purposes or roles to play in life. Consequently, human beings do not have any authority from God, that is, from a Christian’s point of view, to terminate any life, which is precious in the eyes of God. Deontology is related to the intrinsic nature and value of human life in that it views any termination of human life as wrong. Naturally, or conventionally, however justified the termination of human life may be, there are always arguments which suggest that the act of killing is morally wrong. Perhaps it is even the reason many countries have banned the death sentence and opted for life imprisonment of criminals who commit even the most grievous offenses.
In the case study, Jessica and Marco are neutral; while Jessica tries to think about her situation, and the future implications of any decision she makes, Marco is willing to give her the total support she may require on any decision she makes. The theory that is applicable to Maria’s argument is deontology, which is part of virtue ethical theories. She is obviously a pious or religious person, and just like the Christian perspective, she believes it is the will of God for the fetus to have such a state. Therefore, that since God has already blessed Jessica with a child through her pregnancy; Maria believes that it is morally wrong for Jessica to terminate the pregnancy because it will be against the will of God. Her religious beliefs are even captured in the way she prays vehemently, and even tries to phone the priest.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
On the other hand, Dr. Wilson believes in utilitarian ethics. Utilitarian ethics looks at the consequences of an action as opposed to the action itself. According to utilitarianism, an action is perceived to be morally permissible if it results into the greatest good (Ainley, 2017). In the case study, Dr. Wilson believes killing the abnormal fetus will be the best action to take, especially because of the consequences that may follow when Jessica decides to carry the pregnancy to maturity. Once born, the baby may develop Down’s syndrome, which is a genetic disorder that may affect the physical and intellectual ability of the baby. Secondly, the baby will not have any arms at all. Such abnormalities imply that Jessica and Marco may have to be forced to spend a considerable part of their time caring for their baby. With no arms, they will need to feed their child, clothe him, and perform many tasks for him. Additionally, they may need to spend a lot of resources taking their child to special schools. Considering that the couple survives on meager wages, the hustle may not be worth it. Dr. Wilson correctly predicts that carrying on with the pregnancy may frustrate the couple in the future, and may also drain their few economic resources.
Concerning the case, I would obviously subscribe to utilitarianism just like Dr. Wilson. I do not believe the fetus, in such a stage is fully developed to come to the conclusion that it has the same status or physical resemblance to a normal human being. The fetus is still developing, not similar to a human being, and therefore, the argument that all life is precious may not hold in this aspect. Secondly, the fetus has abnormalities, and what will likely happen is that if pregnancy is carried to maturity, an innocent soul may be subjected to a lot of suffering. It may not even be about the economic ability of the parents, but it is precisely about surviving in the competitive world. For instance, someone with no arms will have very limited job opportunities. Consequently, their quality of life may be very low. If something undesirable happens, the couple divorces or die, then the child will basically have no one to care for them. The couple will have in essence brought an innocent soul into the world to suffer, and eventually die, while it would have been better for the pregnancy to be terminated at the best stage.
In conclusion, although human life is perceived to be precious, it is also important to be rational and objective depending on the circumstances. I believe a fetus is not as developed as a normal human being, and therefore, some decisions can be made. In the case of Jessica and Marco, the best thing to do is to terminate the pregnancy because the abnormalities of the fetus will have undesirable implications not only to the couple, but also to the life of the child if the pregnancy is carried to maturity. The couple will spend a lot of their time and resources on the child, and the child may suffer and have a low quality of life because of the inability to fit in various life realms.
Reference
Ainley, K. (2017). Virtue ethics and international relations. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies .
