Meta-ethics is a branch of analytic philosophy that seeks to explore and understand the scope of ethical values, properties, and judgment. It addresses the source and foundation of moral values by examining the semantics and ontology of social practices (Sayre-McCord, 2007). The range of affairs that fall under this branch reflects the fact that meta-ethics attempts to step back from particular substantive arguments within morality to seek the opinions, commitments, and assumptions of those engaging in the debate.
The dilemma of the issue of infanticide amongst the members of society has progressively risen over the years. Infanticide is the act of deliberately killing a young child within the year of birth. In the past, the act was a widespread practice and was allowed by several cultures around the world. In recent times, infanticide has been considered unethical and against moral beliefs. However, it is still performed under certain circumstances. Two Australian philosophers, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, contended that the ethical standing of a newborn child is identical to that of a fetus (Sayre-McCord, 2007). There is, therefore, no reason not to see infanticide as morally acceptable given that most people consider abortion as ethically acceptable.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Undesired pregnancies are the most common cause of the killing of newborn babies. In many cases, women lack enough resources to raise children. In other cases, women fail to deliver children with specific preferable characteristics. Such children face passive infanticide through careless parenting and neglect. Some communities perform infanticide due to beliefs derived from biological causes. For instance, children born with disabilities are killed to prevent negative magical effects attributed to their birth. The society considers males valuable than women; as a result, female infanticide is practiced. Moreover, female infanticide is sometimes related to population control.
Over the years, a debate has emerged on whether defective children should be deliberately killed upon birth. The dilemma was instigated by the fact that physicians now can prolong and maintain the lives of individuals with severe congenital disabilities. Previously, children born with brain-related problems would have died soon after birth. Today, most of them are kept alive through advanced live-saving techniques. The situation, therefore, begs the question of whether these children should be saved. The first matter to be considered in attempting to establish the moral standing of infanticide is the position of severely defective infants is the personhood. A clear definition of a person is any human being that possesses functional capabilities for conscious awareness and whose cerebrum is structurally sufficient.
If this criterion is to be used there exist persons and nonpersons depending on the mental status of the defective infants. Those whose cerebral capacity is rudimentarily developed would be nonpersons while those with severe physical abnormalities would be considered persons. Newborn children with no capabilities of consciousness and self-awareness and are in no position to acquire it should certainly not be treated. Use of scarce medical resources to prolong their lives would be unethical. It would deprive the persons an opportunity to receive these resources. The eventual death of the nonpersons would not constitute murder; murder is only done to persons. However, while infanticide of nonperson is not considered murder, it would still be unethical if done in an inhumane manner.
References
Sayre-McCord, G. (2007). Metaethics. Stanford University.
