Utilitarian Perspective On Abortion

Introduction The concept of abortion, regarding its morality and legality, has been one of the most controversial topics worldwide. In particular, this paper will use the Utilitarian perspective to explore the moral dilemma related to genetic/disability-selective abortion and to explain why I believe that this type of abortion is morally permissible.
The Issue and the Ethical/Moral Dilemma By definition, a moral dilemma is a situation involving two or more competing moral principles, which each show characteristics of being both morally right and morally wrong (Collier, 2015). These complex situations surround us and occur on a day-to-day basis. For instance, Kevin Shinkwin, a U.K. lawmaker living with a disability himself, recently proposed
Using this information, I will explain how disability-selective abortion may be seen as morally right from the Utilitarian perspective. First of all, choosing to deliver a child with a known disability is perceived as morally wrong because it causes unnecessary and prolonged suffering, which otherwise could have been prevented through abortion (Edwards, 2001). For instance, Down syndrome, which has one of the highest termination rates, is associated with multiple complications, such as heart problems, hearing loss, vision impairment, and obstructive sleep apnea (Centers for Disease and Control Prevention, 2014). Also, this idea of saving the child from a life filled with pain, adheres to the principle of
For example, individuals with Down syndrome require more assistance and greater health needs (i.e., surgeries, hearing aids, eye glasses, and breathing machines) and thus, greater expenses than individuals without this condition (Centers for Disease and Control Prevention, 2014). Consider a more extreme condition, such as anencephaly, a condition where portions of the skull and brain are absent which may lead to neonatal death or die shortly after birth (Theofanidis et al., 2013). Experiencing this may cause more mental and emotional strain on the family. Furthermore, it is said that families living with handicapped individuals have higher divorce rates and hinder the individuals’ siblings from normal development (Kuhse & Singer, 1985). Therefore, a mother who chooses to abort her child may be perceived as a moral act as it can promote the welfare of the rest of her family, and it complies with principle of utility, and non-maleficence, to some extent. Lastly, assuming that the government and taxpayers’ help with the costs of caring for an individual living with a disability, it benefits the society and thus, complies with the utility principle (Kuhse & Singer,