Introduction
The ethical egoist and social contract ethicist differ, with the former preferring abortion and the latter focusing on the existing law, even with professional and familial conflict for nurses. The ethical egoist supports abortion since it serves individual interests, while a social contract ethicist would only do that if it is grounded in a contract or law. The ethical egoist advocates for the mother’s preference for abortion because their self-interest trumps other people’s views. While a social contract ethicist would prefer following the existing abortion laws, the Code of Ethics for nurses requires them to do the same or advocate for new laws.
The Ethical Egoist’s Perspective
An ethical egoist would support abortion because it allows the woman to decide based on self-interest as they dim best. James Rachels and Stuart Racheal (2018) stated that ethical egoism requires a person to follow their “self-interest exclusively.” In this regard, an ethical egoist would call for any woman who wants an abortion and views it as the best approach to proceed without considering what others say. The ethical egoist takes the woman’s side since they understand their issue the most. Abortion first impacts the mother from a medical standpoint. With that in mind, the mother is out to decide whether to proceed with the pregnancy or not. The ethical egoist would support their moral position by pointing out that altruism is self-defeating because while people understand themselves well, they have an imperfect understanding of others (Rachels & Rachels, 2018). The perspective implies those who want to determine whether a pregnant person should have an abortion or not fail to understand their view well. In my opinion, the best course of action is to deter abortion since legalizing it would amount to an increased mortality rate of unborn children. Generally, I would oppose an egoist’s take on abortion by promoting its prohibition.
The Social Contract Ethicist’s Perspective
The social contract ethicist would prefer a set contract or law regarding abortion, which everyone would then adhere to it. Abortion rights are a pressing issue, with supporters calling for society to stop dictating women’s bodies. The social contract theory advocates the existence of a contract that allows collective existence, thereby leaving the “invidanatura” (Economides, 2018). The theory implies that the social contract ethicist would prefer a set of rules deemed to serve the best interests of abortion to be set up. Thus, the social contract ethicist would take the side supported by the law, which is the contract (Angier, 2018). If the law forbids abortion and someone proceeds, the social contract ethicist would advocate for their reprimand as dictated. The philosopher would justify their position by pointing out that no one can win when there is no contract since everyone will look out for their interests leading to a “constant state of war” (Rachels & Rachels, 2018). In my opinion, establishing a contract that controls abortion is an excellent course of action as opposed to leaving people to decide by themselves whether to abort or not. The freedom given to people based on abortion can yield increased murder cases of not only the unborn children but also infants.
The Impact of the ANA Code of Ethics
Nurses need to promote, advocate, and protect the safety and rights of patients. The American Nurses Association (ANA) Code of Ethics relates to the abortion topic as it requires nurses to look into the interests of the patients. The code calls for nurses to look into the protect patients even when abortion is involved. In this regard, the nurse should protect the patient and give them safe access to abortion when it presents a severe medical impact. The nurse should also follow existing laws on abortion as per the social contract theory (Angier, 2018). In cases when the nurse feels the regulations do not serve the patient’s interests, they can promote and advocate for new contracts. For instance, when one can advocate for an amendment supporting abortion rights, considering the supreme court reverted laws supporting the same. The topic of abortion involves conflict between professional and familial duties. In this regard, the nurse might feel a responsibility not to keep abortion because they would put a stop to procreation (Rachels & Rachels, 2018). By proceeding, it could mean that they do not serve the familial duties as they deem fit. On the other hand, the professional perspective requires them to follow existing laws if they support abortion, thereby presenting a conflict.
Conclusion
The ethical egoist would advocate for abortion when it serves the mother’s self-interest. At the same time, a social contract ethicist would follow the existing contract even as nurses should advocate for abortion rights. The ethical egoist argues that people know themselves best and should be trusted when they need something. If a mother wants an abortion, a nurse or another healthcare professional should allow them to pursue it. The social contract ethicists advocated for following the abortion law at the time, and nurses should do the same or advocate for new abortion laws.
References
Angier, T. (2018). Aristotle and the Charge of Egoism. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 52(4), 457-475.
Economides, N. (2018). The theory of social contract and legitimacy today. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 9(5), 19-28.
Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). Mcgraw-Hill Education.