Replies to Kaczor and Rodger

Philosophy & Technology, 2020

Ectogestation involves the gestation of a fetus in an ex utero environment. The possibility of this technology raises a significant question for the abortion debate: Does a woman's right to end her pregnancy entail that she has a right to the death of the fetus when ectogestation is possible? Some have argued that it does not Mathison & Davis (Bioeth 31:313-320, 2017). Others claim that, while a woman alone does not possess an individual right to the death of the fetus, the genetic parents have a collective right to its death Räsänen (Bioeth 31:697-702, 2017). In this paper, I argue that the possibility of ectogestation will radically transform the problem of abortion. The argument that I defend purports to show that, even if it is not a person, there is no right to the death of a fetus that could be safely removed from a human womb and gestated in an artificial womb, because there are competent people who are willing to care for and raise the fetus as it grows into a person. Thus, given the possibility of ectogestation, the moral status of the fetus plays no substantial role in determining whether there is a right to its death.

Monash Bioethics Review

The potential benefits of an alternative to physical gestation are numerous. These include providing reproductive options for prospective parents who are unable to establish or maintain a physiological pregnancy, and saving the lives of some infants born prematurely. Ectogenesis could also promote sexual equality in reproduction, and represents a necessary option for women experiencing an unwanted pregnancy who are morally opposed to abortion. Despite these broad, and in some cases unique benefits, one major ethical concern is the potential impact of this emerging technology on abortion rights. This article will argue that ectogenesis poses a challenge to many common arguments in favour of a pregnant woman's right to choose, but only insomuch as it highlights that their underlying justifications for abortion are based on flawed conceptions of what the foetus and pregnancy actually are. By interrogating the various interests and relationships involved in a pregnancy, this article will demonstrate that the emergence of artificial gestation need not impact existing abortion rights or legislation, nor definitions of independent viability or moral status.

Journal of Medical Ethics, 2023

A few decades from now, it might become possible to gestate fetuses in artificial wombs. Ectogestation as this is called, raises major legal and ethical issues, especially for abortion rights. In countries allowing abortion, regulation often revolves around the viability threshold the point in fetal development after which the fetus can survive outside the womb. How should viability be understood and abortion thus regulated after ectogestation? Should we ban, allow or require the use of artificial wombs as an alternative to standard abortions? Drawing on I.G. Cohen, I evaluate three possible positions for the post-ectogestative abortion laws: restrictive, conservative and liberal. While the restrictive position appears untenable, I argue that the liberal and conservative positions can be combined to form a legally and morally coherent basis for post-ectogestative abortion legislation, offering an improvement from the point of both pro-life and pro-choice positions.

Bioethics, 2017

Many people believe that the abortion debate will end when at some point in the future it will be possible for fetuses to develop completely outside the womb. Ectogenesis, as this technology is called, would make possible to reconcile pro-life and pro-choice positions. That is because it is commonly believed that there is no right to kill the fetus if it can be detached alive and gestated in an artificial womb. Recently Eric Mathison and Jeremy Davis defended this position, by arguing against three common arguments for a right to the death of the fetus. I claim that their arguments are mistaken. I argue that there is a right to the death of the fetus because gestating a fetus in an artificial womb when genetic parents refuse it violates their rights not to become a biological parent, their rights to genetic privacy and their property rights. The right to the death of the fetus, however, is not a woman's right but genetic parents' collective right which can be used only together.

De Ethica

Many people believe the morality of abortion stands or falls with the moral status of the fetus. Judith Jarvis Thomson’s violinist argument bypasses the question of fetal moral status; even if the fetus has a right to life, she argues the gestational mother has a right to disconnect herself from the fetus. However, should ectogenesis – a technology that would allow the fetus to develop outside the womb – become sufficiently advanced, the fetus would no longer need a gestational mother to live. Recently, Joona Räsänen has argued that parents have a right to secure the death of a fetus that has been removed from the mother’s body, and that this right might extend to infanticide. However, here I argue Räsänen’s position ignores the moral status of the fetus; if the fetus is morally comparable to beings like us, then of course parents lack a right to the death of their children. However, if the fetus is morally comparable to a tumor, then the right to kill it is philosophically unin...

In contemporary times, ?abortion? is one of the important dilemmas confronting to human society. It is a dilemma from which we cannot escape, and to which we have a collective responsibility to address. All dilemmas have two alternatives, and to choose one over the other can be a very difficult choice for any person. Even though there might not always be a ?solution? which can be universally applied, we have to decide what ought to be done in various situations. Human beings are responsible for their actions and morality depends on human actions. But morality does not exist in a vacuum, and what defines morality varies from situation to situation. So in decision-making, there is a place of the ?virtue of prudence?. Most of us try to take the best decision possible in a particular situation. It is therefore important for individuals to practice prudence. Each individual should know the criteria of what exactly defines ?prudent? behavior, what the grounds for good human action are, and what actions are morally justifiable. In this regard, I shall analyze Philippa Foot?s suggestions vis-?-vis the debate of abortion. In this Paper I have two Sections. In the first section I am discussing the various moral issues on abortion and I begin in section II by discussing a speculative framework of choice that outlines the ways and give an exposition of the value of prudence which is used in this area and also offer some suggestions for changing the existing legal, social, and political scenery to better respect the capacity of all women for reproductive self-determination. I also briefly discuss the implications of my analysis for the future of the broader abortion debate.

Balkan Social Science Review, 2020

The ending of pregnancy is an issue that keeps attracting great attention even today, at the beginning of the 21st century. Since the 1970s, abortion legislation has moved steadily towards liberalization, especially in developed countries around the world. In Europe, only a few countries still prohibit abortion on request. Yet neither the current legislation nor the relevant case law of supreme and constitutional courts have brought about consensus on the justification thereof. An exceptionally delicate matter made so by a wealth of moral, ethical, philosophical, medical, religious, economic, legal and other aspects, abortion is a bone of contention in the general public and many an expert community. The reasoning provided in constitutional reviews of law is lambasted in equal measure by the pro-choice and the pro-life camps, the latter of which are felt in presence and influence despite the ever-growing liberalization. The paper primarily examines the matter of abortion in comparat...

resuMen Palabras Clave: Aborto, descriminalización, ética, política, derecho, Sentencia C-355/06.

Studia Gilsoniana, 2018

The author discusses the problem of abortion. He defines abortion as a deliberate and immediate killing of a human being before birth; he distinguishes it from spontaneous miscarriage or a situation where the child is allowed to die without this being intended, where the death is the result of causes not dependent upon acting persons—abortus indirectus. In order to morally evaluate the act of abortion, the author considers both the ontic status of the conceived human being and the criteria usually used for the evaluation.

Since the legalisation of abortion took place, the number of abortions has risen considerably in many countries. Making use of a philosophical framework developed by Paul Ricoeur, Ward Biemans points at several inconsistencies of the current British and Dutch abortion legislation. It is estimated that besides several physical problems, each year some 42,000 British and 6,000 Dutch women suffer from long-term mental health problems after procured abortion. Discussing the main ethical considerations, Biemans argues that human embryos possess an intrinsic human dignity, even if this dignity still needs to flourish. This book further provides an overview of theological reflections on abortion throughout the centuries, mainly from a catholic perspective. Recommendations are made to expand and improve the available care for women with unintended pregnancies and possibly for their partners.