The Morality of Abortion
Soazig Le Bihan - University of
Montana
1
Outline
Introduction: What this chapter is about
The Person Argument
The question of Personhood
Marquis: An alternative to the person argument
Thomson: Is it always wrong to kill an innocent?
Conclusion
2
Introduction: What is at stake?
What this chapter is about
Deepening our understanding of the arguments on both
sides
Two opposite values
The fetus’ ``right to life”
The mother’s ``right over her own body”
3
Outline
Introduction: What this chapter is about
The Person Argument
The question of Personhood
Marquis: An alternative to the person argument
Thomson: Is it always wrong to kill an innocent?
Conclusion
4
The Person Argument
The Person Argument:
An important distinction
P1: The fetus is an innocent person
P2: It is wrong to kill an innocent person
CC: It is wrong to kill a fetus
The argument is valid: is it sound?
P1: what is a person?
P2: is it always true?
5
Outline
Introduction: What this chapter is about
The Person Argument
The question of Personhood
Marquis: An alternative to the person argument
Thomson: Is it always wrong to kill an innocent?
Conclusion
6
The question of Personhood
The Problem
The question of personhood is crucial: To assess the
argument, we need:
- Either sufficient conditions that the fetus satisfies
- Or necessary conditions that the fetus does not satisfy
What makes a person a person? Persons are what we don’t
kill lightly
-Class survey: what is ok to kill?
-The alien thought experiment
Is there any satisfactory criteria?
7
The question of Personhood
Discussion
Criteria often given by the
opponents:
1. Being alive
2. Human shape
3. Human DNA
Problem:
1. All animals
2. Robots
3. Any human cell
 TOO BROAD
Criteria often given by the
defendants:
1. Intelligence
2. Communication skills
3. Moral agent
Problem:
Mentally handicapped and
insane people
 TOO NARROW
8
The question of Personhood
Conclusion
The question of personhood: Dead end?
A proposal: Sentience as a necessary and sufficient
conditions for not killing lightly
 The absurdities are thus avoided
Consequences:
-Animals
-Fetus after 20th week
Another option is to avoid the question of Personhood
altogether: Marquis and Thomson
9
Outline
Introduction: What this chapter is about
The Person Argument
The question of Personhood
Marquis: An alternative to the person argument
Thomson: Is it always wrong to kill an innocent?
Conclusion
10
Beyond the question of personhood
Marquis: A future like ours
The question of wrongful killing: criteria?
- Against desire?
- Interruption of valuable experience?
Marquis’ proposal: An instance of killing is wrong when it
deprives someone of a valuable future like ours.
 general explanation of why we think it is wrong to kill
Consequences:
-VAS ok
-Wrong to kill humans, animals, and fetuses
 Marquis: abortion is wrong because it deprives the
fetus of a valuable future like ours
11
Beyond the question of personhood
Steinbock: Objections against Marquis
What does it take to have a future?: Personal identity, that
is, a way to link the individual now to the future
Two theories of personal identity:
1.Physical Theory of identity (Phys-TI)
2.Psychological Theory of identity (Psy-TI)
Dilemma:
-If Phys-TI, absurdity
-If Psy-TI, then sentience is necessary
 As in the case of the Person Argument, it seems
that there is no wrongful killing without sentience
12
Outline
Introduction: What this chapter is about
The Person Argument
The question of Personhood
Marquis: An alternative to the person argument
Thomson: Is it always wrong to kill an innocent?
Conclusion
13
Thomson and The Violinist
Deals with Premise 2 of the Person Argument: Is it always
wrong to kill an innocent person?
Thomson’s analogy: hooked up on a violinist without consent
Thomson’s analogy:
In which cases would you think it is ok to unhook yourself?
 Thomson’s point: the answer is not obvious
 We have to distinguish between cases
14
Thomson’s Analogy: Assessment
In which cases does the analogy work – Warren?
-Rape
-Mother’s health endangered
What about the other cases? – failure of birth control
Jane English: performance and reception
 These are analogies: can we find a rational basis
for the argument?
15
An Important Distinction:
Moral Obligations vs. Moral Favor
Thomson’s main thesis:
We are not morally obligated to help another in such
circumstances, but it will be a great moral favor
Moral Obligation
Something that one must
do on pain of immorality
BLAME if not done
Ex: keep your promise
Moral Favor
Something that one can do
above moral obligations
PRAISE if done
Ex: Britney Spears’ Touch
and the Good Samaritan
 Keeping the child in case of unwanted pregnancies
is a moral favor, not a moral obligation
16
Thomson: Conclusion
Thomson’s main thesis on abortion:
A continuum of cases, ranking from clear cases of great
moral favors and moral indecency
Moral Indecency Good Samaritan
Moral favor
Moral Obligation
Sacrifice
Beware of the slippery slope !
17
Outline
Introduction: What this chapter is about
The Person Argument
The question of Personhood
Marquis: An alternative to the person argument
Thomson: Is it always wrong to kill an innocent?
Conclusion
18
The Morality of Abortion
Conclusion
A central notion for wrongful killing: sentience
An important distinction for assessing our actions
Moral favors vs. Moral Obligation
An important lesson for abortion:
No straightforward answer but continuum of cases:
- Clear cases in which abortion is wrong
- Clear cases in which abortion is right
- Continuum of cases in the middle
19