According to the utilitarian theory, the proper course of action is believed to maximize utility. In other words, the moral worth of an action is estimated solely by its resulting outcome; however, a number of experts are considering including the intended, unforeseen and actual consequences into this definition1. This paper opposes the concept of abortion on the basis of utilitarian theory.
Abortion has been defined by various authors in different contexts. In simple terms, irrespective of the reasons behind it, abortion involves the termination of human pregnancy deliberately. Abortion can be conducted under various circumstances. For instance, doctors may advice an expectant mother to terminate her pregnancy if they have solid evidence indicating that the lives of both the mother and child are in danger. On the other hand, utilitarian theory is based on the ability to foretell a repercussion in respect to an undertaken act. As such, the decision which attracts a better deal to the majority is considered to be ethically correct. Utilitarian theory also aims at comparing two related predictions to arrive at an ethical decision.
Additionally, utilitarian is divided into act and rule utilitarianism. In act utilitarianism, one performs an action that is beneficial to the majority regardless of personal feelings or law. Let us examine the concept of an expectant mother under the act of utilitarianism. Assuming that the expectant mother wants to terminate her pregnancy and the people surrounding her (for instance her family members and friends) are against her decision, she cannot continue with her termination plans lest she be considered as an ethically immoral woman in society and risk losing the company of her friends and relatives.
In such a scenario, the expectant mother is advised to compare her current situation to a similar situation which happened previously to predict the consequence of her action, and putting into consideration that her society is morally upright, she will opt to keep the baby since it will do her more good than harm.
On the other hand, utilitarianism is governed by law and fairness. An action taken ought to attract the majority and must be free and fair in terms of law. It has an additional beneficence principle which aims at doing good. In the case of an expectant mother, even if she wanted, she will have no right whatsoever to terminate the pregnancy because of the three reasons. First and foremost, the majority of people will not abide by her since abortion is considered to be an immoral act of human murder.
Secondly, the law is there to protect the fetus. If the law is aimed at protecting the fetus from abortion, the woman will have no right to violate the law. Last but not least, the expectant mother must be of age to distinguish what is right and wrong as stipulated in the beneficence principle. Her conscious will help her in arriving at the ethical decision of keeping the baby.
I conclude by re-affirming that every human being, whether born or not has the right to life and nobody should deprive them that unless under limited factors. We are alive because we were given the opportunity to exist, so why deny a fellow human being? Let us embrace ethical values because this will help us make the society a better world even to our unborn generations.
Bibliography
Cara, Maryann. Complications of Abortion (Geneva: WHO, 2002), 210.
Rainbow, Catherine. Description of ethical theories and principles. New York: Paperback, 2002. Web.
Vaughn, Lewis. Doing Ethics: Moral reasoning and contemporary issues (New York: Paperback, 2012), 5.