Abortion is a highly contentious topic worldwide because of diverse cultures and conflicting ideas regarding women’s reproduction and the life of an unborn fetus. Individuals opposing abortion suggest that no one has the right to determine whether a fetus lives. However, apart from being a moral issue, abortion is a legal concern because of different laws across national borders. “Abortion around the World” analyzes abortion laws in different regions around the globe and explains what practitioners are allowed to do when dealing with associated issues. Nevertheless, this paper looks at the issue from an ethical perspective and provides recommendations on what is best when faced with a dilemma. Medical practitioners and nurses should familiarize themselves with legal restrictions surrounding abortion, refrain from engaging in the procedure without substantial reasons, and ensure patient safety if the operation is necessary. Otherwise, medical officers might incur criminal liability and even lose their license if found guilty of going against medical standards and legal codes. Adhering to the proposed recommendations will enable me to avoid litigation issues and prevent me from going against the tenets of ethical medical practice.
Many countries have acknowledged that abortion is one of the safest medical operations if done appropriately. As a result, most of the world’s population resides in areas where laws permit abortion. Regardless, health systems still require medical practitioners to satisfy some requirements, such as providing counseling, waiting for a certain period into the pregnancy, and limited advertising (Abortion around the World, 2018). However, some individuals live in areas where abortion is strictly outlawed, but this does not prevent them from seeking services and terminating pregnancies. On the contrary, these laws expose individuals to unsafe practices, most of which facilitate adverse outcomes and sometimes lead to the mother’s death. Carrying out an abortion without reason, such as saving a woman’s life from fetal deformities, is against health practitioners’ oath and moral standing (Hersey et al., 2022). Nevertheless, a medical practitioner may have grounds to perform an abortion, including the ones mentioned above and other medical emergencies, but lack consent or place themselves at risk of litigation. Thus, the case of abortion and its laws in different countries lead to ethical concerns that are difficult to resolve.
Being prompted to perform an abortion for purposes other than medical emergencies in a region where abortion is illegal is a dilemma because it is good and bad simultaneously. For example, refusing to perform the abortion poses a risk to the patient’s well-being in the future as they may have become pregnant through rape or violent circumstances such as assault. In many jurisdictions, a practitioner should not perform the procedure unless it is to save a mother’s life and pregnancy due to incest (Abortion around the World, 2018). Thus, these reasons might not be substantial enough to warrant an abortion. Although performing an abortion would satisfy the mother and assure her comfort as she continues with her life, a practitioner may face damaging consequences due to the unethical practice. Therefore, going either way places pressure on the medical practitioner as they would not have adhered to medical standards or legal stipulations.
The principles of non-maleficence, beneficence, justice, and autonomy are all associated with abortion and are considered before performing the procedure. Autonomy holds that all individuals have the right to decide about their bodies, while beneficence suggests that doctors should do whatever they can to promote others’ well-being. Non-maleficence means doing no harm, while justice proposes that practitioners should not discriminate (Hersey et al., 2022). Thus, the autonomy and beneficence principles can encourage a doctor to carry out the procedure but justice and non-maleficence dispute abortion. The opposition to abortion laws claims that the act harms the fetus and discriminates against it by not giving it a chance to live. Hence, medical principles support and condone abortion depending on a practitioner’s perspective and preferences.
The kind of ethical issue associated with abortion is a moral dilemma because the procedure raises questions about a woman’s autonomy and bodily rights, the value of a fetus’ life, and access to safe abortion. Safe abortion practices are hardly accessible to mothers in marginalized neighborhoods and low-income areas. As a result, individuals in these groups are still exposed to hazards even in jurisdictions where abortion is legal (Grossman et al., 2022). The situation is worse for pregnant women in areas where abortion is illegal as they rely on underground methods and non-certified individuals who increase the chances of adverse outcomes. Additionally, whether a fetus is a person with rights and moral values is debatable (Hersey et al., 2022). Some argue that life begins at conception, while others propose that a fetus is not human until the later stages of pregnancy. Moreover, feminists and activists argue that women have the autonomy to decide what happens to their bodies. Thus, these dilemmas are multifaceted and complex because different cultures have varying perspectives.
Abortion is an issue that policymakers and scholars can analyze using several lenses. For example, it is a problem embedded in relationships because of the link between a fetus, the mother, her partner, and society. Thus, it considers matters such as the right to privacy and autonomy. Similarly, the issue can be assessed using an ethical principled-based approach involving moral guidelines of autonomy, beneficence, justice, and maleficence (Hersey et al., 2022). Similarly, deontological theories apply to the issue as they acknowledge practitioners’ moral duties and evaluate actions based on outcomes (Boylan, 2020). However, the problem of abortion can be evaluated from additional perspectives, such as feminism, which considers the implications of the society of women’s decisions, reproductive rights, and the implications of the procedure on their general health (Boylan, 2020). Similarly, investigating how abortion intersects with factors such as class, race, and other demographics may be beneficial in obtaining a comprehensive picture.
In conclusion, the legal and moral status of abortion is an issue facing great controversy because of individuals’ strong beliefs in cultural values and moral perspectives. Practitioners in different areas around the globe adhere to different legal stipulations regarding abortion. The article “Abortion around the World” explains the implications of these regulations on practitioners’ decision-making and the problem of patient safety during the procedure. According to my analysis of various sources, the decision of whether or not to perform an abortion lies on the mother and the doctor’s moral standing because of conflicting principles. Autonomy and beneficence support abortion, while non-maleficence and justice dispute the procedure. Regardless, the stakeholders should scrutinize the issue from different perspectives, including how age, sex, and class intersections affect individuals’ quality of life and their decision on whether to have the procedure. However, medical personnel and nurses should try their best to refrain from performing the procedure or ensure the highest possible safety for the mother if the operation is necessary for medical emergencies or other reasons.
References
Abortion around the World. (2018). In Gale Essential Overviews: Scholarly. Gale.Web.
Boylan, M. (2020). The abortion debate in the twenty-first century. Global Bioethics and Human Rights: Contemporary Perspectives.
Grossman, D., Perritt, J., & Grady, D. (2022). The impending crisis of access to safe abortion care in the US. JAMA Internal Medicine. Web.
Hersey, A. E., Potter-Rutledge, J. M., & Brown, B. P. (2022). Abortion policies at the bedside: Incorporating an ethical framework in the analysis and development of abortion legislation. Journal of Medical Ethics. Web.