Abortion Rights

‘The mother’s right to life should always overrule the rights of her unborn child’ (15 marks)

There is a huge debate of who’s right should overrule the other, between the mother and the baby. Some people believe that the mother will have the greater right to life, whereas others argue that the unborn child does. By saying that a person has ‘rights’ it means that people are free to make their own choices and are entitled to be somewhere or do as they want.

Firstly, some people believe that the mother has the greatest right to life and should always overrule the rights of the unborn child. A pregnancy can have a massive impact on the mother. It has physiological and emotional changes on the mother, it also puts the mother’s body under great pressure and there are significant health risks attached. For this reason, people will argue that the mother’s health is superior to the foetuses. It will be the mother who has to support the child through the pregnancy which will physically and mentally affect her health and her freedom and therefore she will be the main person affected and should have the choice on whether she should or should have the child. This view is pro-choice which will argue for the mother’s right to life over the unborn child’s.
The reasoning behind why people believe that the mother’s rights overrule the rights of the unborn child’s is because the unborn child has not yet adopted personhood and therefore does not have the same rights as the mother who has full personhood. Personhood is the status of being a human being. However the problem is when personhood begins which is the dispute to when the unborn child becomes a human being. Whereas others argue that the foetus is a growing human being and is a potential person. The court says that a foetus is not a person but ‘potential life’ and therefore the mother’s life should overrule the unborn foetuses.
For example, in an ectopic pregnancy. The fallopian tube is removed and the embryo dies, this will save the mother. In this situation both lives cannot be saved, therefore by saving the mother’s life which is the main aim, although this has a double effect, to save the mother's life it kills the unborn child. In this situation the mother’s life is seen more important than the unborn child, as the unborn child is a threat to her life, therefore the mother has a right to save her life. The intention is not to ‘kill’, it is doing evil (killing the foetus) for a good reason (saving the mother.) Liberal protestant see this as “the lesser of two evils.” The mother’s life is not only valuable to her, but also valuable to others. For example, the mother may have other children. She already has responsibility to look after her children and may cause emotional distress if she died as a result of not having an abortion.
However, on the other hand some people may argue that the unborn child also has great life to rights, as they are completely dependent on the mother it needs protection as it cannot speak for itself. Many people think that the foetus as a distinct human being from conception with its own right.
Religious teachings may also be a reason why the unborn child's rights overrule the mothers. Christians believe a foetus is human from conception, with the same rights and value to God as a child who has already been born. “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart.” this quote shows that god has a plan for every human being even before they are born, when they are just a foetus and abortion would destroy this.
This depends on when the mother thinks the life of her unborn child’s life begins. For example some people believe that life begins at different stages, some believe it starts at the moment of conception, Such as John Grigg which he calls ‘the magic moment’. And others who believe that life begin at birth, such as Dee Wells who says ‘it’s not a human being until it can survive outside of the womb’. This may affect when the mother believes the unborn child takes full rights of personhood and when they have equal rights to the mother. This raises the question when should full human rights status be given to the unborn child.
Overall, I believe that the idea of potentiality is an important point and agree that a potential person isn't the same as an actual person. I also think that women are already persons whereas foetuses are not. I believe that this is a good argument towards the mothers having greater rights than the unborn child. Although I believe that the unborn child does have some rights, I do not believe there will ever be a situation where I believe the child's rights overrule the mothers.
Therefore, in conclusion to this, I believe the mother’s right to life should always overrule the rights of her unborn child because I believe that the arguments for the mother’s life overruling the rights of the unborn child are much stronger than the child having more rights than the mother.