Medical Ethics: Women Seeking Abortion Should Have Artificial Wombs (Essay Sample)

An argumentative essay on whether Women seeking Abortion should be required to have Artificial Wombs
Name:
Institution:
Instructor:
Date:
Abstract
The present legal and political arguments are based on the misconstruction that the choice to have a termination is one choice, a choice to abort the fetus. In the actual sense, in deciding to terminate, the mother is making two different decisions: first, she is deciding to abort her pregnancy, in other terms, get rid of the fetus from her body; and secondly, she is deciding to terminate it. Presently, a mother’s choice to take the fetus from her body (autonomy choice) is essentially a medical choice to remove the fetus (the reproductive choice). The present dispute favoring legalized termination assumes that the mother’s autonomy benefit is attached to the reproductive choice. With the development of artificial wombs, the choices can arrive at discretely with a live conception of a fetus raising no more dangers to the mother than a normal abortion. In this essay, I will support the argument that women seeking an abortion should be required to have artificial wombs.
Introduction
Challengers of autonomous access to termination contend that the fetus relishes, from the time of its birth, similar absolute “right to life,” which any other being enjoyed. Supporters of autonomous access to termination claim that the privilege to a termination is granted by the constitution and grounded on a female’s freedom of privacy. This debate had played out constantly in courtrooms since Roe versus Wade and was constant most currently when the highest court considered a state injunction on “partial birth” terminations. Astonishingly, activists on both sides of the divide have missed the actual importance of “partial birth” termination. It is high time for people the realize that partial-birth termination is an illustration of the built-in outmodedness of the debate over termination, and prefigures the termination of the abortion dispute. Activists of these two sides had all but overlooked the influence of advancing medical technology on their ideas.
Arguments for
First, I accept the fact females are always eligible to uterine emptying since the fetus lack any privilege of occupancy of the mother’s body, but not inevitably to the second form of termination, entailing fetal demise, as the mother lacks the privilege to the perishing of the fetus if it can live in other humanmade conditions (Christine, 2015). Since fetal existence is certainly sustainable via artificial wombs, then I strongly argue that a mother seeking termination should be compelled to carry out a form of abortion that allows the existence of the fetus. The fetus can then be shifted to complete growth in an artificial womb. Now that we have the technology to permit the survival of the fetus, there is an ethical responsibility to gestate a fetus, which subsisted the abortion. Honestly speaking, this offers an answer to the termination dispute, one that contents both the advocates of mothers’ bodily autonomy and opponents that cry for the slaughter of the fetus.
Secondly, accessibility of humanmade wombs would empower females to enjoy biological control and free their bodies of an undesirable fetus and the problems of expectancy without demanding the destruction of the fetus (Christine, 2015). The most protruding validation for abortion privileges among people is that females have the privilege to regulate what transpires to their bodies, not forgetting the privilege to terminate parasitic survival of fetus in their bodies should need to arise. Of course, pre-feasibility, discharging the fetus unavoidably spells its demise. But then again, the most conventional abortion privileges argument seems not to contend for a privilege to choose the decease of the fetus per se, just the privilege to terminate a pregnancy, nevertheless, the inevitability of fetus death. Humanmade wombs would extremely displace this validation by presenting the solution to end expectancy minus killing the unborn. The hymn “my body, my choice” will lack much attention once females’ bodies are set out of the bracket. This is particularly true when the expenses and dangers of relocating the fetus to a humanmade womb no less harmful or expensive compared to that of terminating the fetus. Basically, for a similar cost, she can remove the fetus whereas sustaining it. In such cases, it implies that the privilege to termination could just be offered as the privilege to the demise of the fetus (Christine, 2015).
The use of artificial wombs will also solve the issue of a large number of abortions triggered by market forces. The demand for females to raise an income has already prompted a huge influence on our communal reproductive decisions. Many females delay or dodge pregnancy since work engagement is designed in line with the social demands of the father, not the employed mother. This is often vindicated based on personal decisions, but the panorama of lost incomes or poverty barely makes it a free choice. Thus, the introduction of artificial wombs would decline rates of completely terminating the fetus since mothers will be able to continue working while their fetuses are kept well. Additionally, these financial pressures also affect our need for childcare. Since Ectogenesis plays a similar role of pre-birth childcare, recommending it for women seeking an abortion will decline pregnancy’s troublesome predisposition of unsettling employment.
Arguments against
On the other side of the coin, the technology of artificial wombs makes the very process itself of eliminating a pregnancy nonconsensual, in two ways. First, instead of doing the pregnancy close in a manner that best meets the healthcare requirements of the mother, such a termination dictates either forcing a specific form of an operation on the woman, which is a kind of assault, or persuading her to endure persuaded labor to intensify the chances of survival of the fetus. In either way, the mother would be deemed endure, minus her informed consent, a process which would not be in her best comforts, but instead, would be intended at fetal existence. Additionally, artificial womb procedure entails taking something from the mother’s body minus her informed consent. This is so equivalent, on the side of the physician and the government, to intentionally steal a body part, though questionably worse in the long run.
The other point why women seeking an abortion should not be required to use an artificial womb is that a female seeking abortion don't want a person associated with herself, being brought up by another person. She is deciding that her future kid not survive totally. Catriona Mackenzie states that in going for a termination, a mother is not just deciding not to permit the fetus habitation of her womb, nor is she just deciding not to be accountable for the specific future kid. Instead, she is choosing that there be no being totally in a link to whom she is in a case of such accountability (Mackenzie, 137). Leslie Cannold says that an empirical research of 45 Australian females depicts that females who support termination privileges view it not merely as the culmination of pregnancy, but also as the culmination of the life of the fetus. They pursue the perishing of the fetus as a method of putting an end to the conception of a future kid to whom they would be accountable if it were artificial nourished and later adopted (Cannold, 60). I come to an agreement that mothers seeking aborti...