The debates about abortion do not seem to be edging closer to a conclusion as new issues emerge every day. According to Scarfone, 2019 witnessed a new spate of anti-abortion measures that were enacted across the United States (1). The new area of the division was whether abortion should be allowed for pregnancies resulting from rape. Without digging deeper into the issues of contention, abortion is inherently immoral and it should not be allowed. Many artists hold the same belief, which they openly express in their pieces of work. In this paper, a poem titled ‘Cry of An Unborn Child’ written by Gabrielle Kruger is used to support the claim that abortion is immoral.
While abortion debates revolve around the autonomy of the mothers, many of the contentious issues have to do with whether the fetuses have similar rights as humans. In other words, it is a conversation of when life begins and when unborn children can start to be conceptualized as humans. However, these debates should not exist if humans are inherently moral. The poem by Kruger uses the persona of the unborn child to beg the mother for a chance to live. In the second stanza, lines 1 to 5, the baby claims it is growing as days go by and soon will be able to hear its mother’s voice. In line 5, the baby says “please mommy, don’t let them hurt me-” (Kruger). The audience is treated to an emotional plea of a fetus who has a soul and whose life is at the mercy of its mother. In this sense, the fetus is simply an unborn human being who desires and desires to live as long as its mother will hear the plea and protect it.
Any individual who believes themselves to be human would be influenced by the tone of the poem. The sense of desperation can be felt when the unborn child promises to do anything, including making breakfast on Mother’s Day and drawing pictures meant for its mother. It even promises to go to school and sing loudly in its first concert (Kruger). For the audience, this should be how it feels when one’s life is on someone’s leash and knowing that it will only take one decision to be forfeited. The position held in this paper is that no human being should be treated this way, even if it is a fetus growing in a woman’s womb. Where is humanity if unborn children have to beg mothers for life? These are very emotional and sensitive questions that seem to hardly cross people’s minds when they try to find excuses to abort. Today, the human race has advanced intellectually, and it can be argued that there are ways the dilemma can be avoided in the first place. If people are to decide on whether or not to abort, why not make a better decision of not getting pregnant?
The poem supports the claim regarding the immorality of abortion, albeit from an emotional perspective. However, rational, ethical, moral, and philosophical perspectives also hold similar claims despite the divisions on a few technicalities. For example, the question of personhood takes center stage where a decision has to be made on whether fetuses are moral persons (Bobier and Omelianchuk 1). It can be expected that people will only make decisions and uphold the premises that support their arguments. Faced with the dilemma of whether or not to abort, a woman would most likely adopt the standpoint which states that fetuses are not moral persons. That way, the woman easily gets her way and proceeds with the abortion. The fact that the debate takes place in the first place means that people are eager to exploit any loopholes within the moral principles in a desperate need to pursue their selfish interests. The debate can be equated to a criminal exploiting a loophole in the law to commit a crime with the knowledge that the interpretation of the case in question is subjective enough to allow room for the crime.
The need to keep this debate going is that regardless of whether a society is largely pro-life or pro-choice, abortion is a practice that has persisted even where it is outlawed. According to Blackshaw and Rodger, a substantial proportion of human embryos tend to die within a few weeks of conception as women undertake abortions (1). For pro-life ethicists, that is equivalent to murder, especially since they believe that fetuses have the same moral status as human beings. As moral persons, fetuses are entitled to live as all other humans are. Going back to the poem, Kruger gives the person the voice of an individual who is already a soul. This means that the fetus received this soul upon conception as Kruger states in the fourth line of the first stanza “when God made me, he gave me a soul.” These words are arguably from a pro-life ethicist who believes moral personhood applies to fetuses as well. If this position was to hold, then no fetus should be like the persona of the poem begging their mothers for the chance to experience what life has to offer.
The claim made in this paper would be incomplete without addressing the few concerns of the pro-choice believers, at least to prove why their moral standpoint is wrong. One of the main arguments posed by pro-choice supporters is the unconscious violist attached to a person without the individual’s consent (Crummett 215). In this case, detaching from the violist would be fatal for the violist until nine months are over when it would be safe to do so. This argument targets unwanted pregnancies, for which rape is included. In the case of rape, it can be argued that the woman is powerless and the freedom of choice taken from her. Should such a woman be allowed to abort from the perspective of the violinist argument? In as much as it would not please the pro-life supporters, there have to be exemptions in the application of moral personhood. In most other cases, adults consenting to sexual intercourse are expected to understand that pregnancy is a possibility and should never be allowed to use the violinist argument.
Except for rape, all human choices that allow them to end life remain unacceptable. From a moral perspective, individuals seeking the freedom of choice have to be responsible enough to understand how their choices affect other people. If a woman values her body so much as not to want a fetus growing inside of her, she should be responsible enough to ensure that pregnancy does not happen. If one gets pregnant, the responsibility shifts to ensuring that the fetus grows to become a human being who can enjoy life and human rights. In Kruger’s poem, it is hard to establish why the persona has to beg for his or her life. Many social groups have moved to push for a ban on abortion up to birth, including the Catholic Church in Northern Ireland. The pro-life activism depicted in this case adopts an almost similar tone to the poem by Kruger. In the photograph shown below, the voice of the unborn children is projected as they beg for love and protection from fatal discrimination.
Regardless of what choices individuals feel they have towards their bodies, it can be argued that the moral responsibility of a rational human being should dictate what choices are right or wrong. The greatest choice for the pro-choice supporters would be to avoid all possibilities of getting pregnant, in which case the society would not need to argue for or against abortion. Instead of asking the question of why a baby should be allowed to live, one should ask why should anyone allow an unwanted child to be formed in the first place. From the picture shown above and the poem by Kruger, abortion is fatal discrimination where infants are denied their rights due to their inability to express themselves.
Instead of pursuing the debate, the claim made in this paper can be supported by other less-explored alternatives. For example, technology has advanced where fetuses can develop outside their mothers’ wombs. Therefore, there is a question of why would people not pursue this alternative rather than quickly resorting to abortion. There can be justifiable cases where the pregnancies are unwanted, including cases of rape. With modern technologies, it is possible to remove fetuses from the mother and develop externally. It is sad to notice that some parents struggle to get children of their own and resort to adopting while those who can choose to abort. Putting up fetuses for abortion is another alternative for parents willing to adopt children for one reason or another.
The suggestion of using modern technologies is simply a recommendation and a viable alternative that would ease the heat in the pro-life versus pro-choice debate. The position remains that life begins at conception where the embryos and fetuses should be given every opportunity to experience life. Otherwise, blindly supporting abortion without considering options can be labeled simply as a murderous sentiment. If women cannot prevent pregnancies, they can have the choice of taking full responsibility for finding the fetus an alternative environment to grow and develop. According to Bobier and Omelianchuk, abortion is not different from killing the child after it is born (1). Therefore, society as a whole should embrace whatever alternatives are available to ensure that all children are treated as moral persons.
In conclusion, the poem by Kruger has been used to support the claim that abortion is inherently immoral. Scholarly works have also been used to support the same claim and to address the main argument by those who find moral loopholes to support the practices. Additionally, the paper offers viable alternatives that no one seems to address or consider in the form of modern medical technologies that can support human life outside a woman’s womb. The pro-life versus pro-choice debate can ease when such solutions are sought jointly.
Works Cited
Blackshaw, Bruce, and Daniel Rodger. “The Problem of Spontaneous Abortion: Is the Pro-Life Position Morally Monstrous?” The New Bioethics, vol. 25, no. 2, 2019, pp. 1-18.
Bobier, Christopher, and Adam Omelianchuk. “A Dilemma for Appeals to the Moral Significance of Birth.” Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 47, no. 3, 2021, pp. 1-14.
Caldwell, Simon. “Northern Ireland Rejects UK-Imposed Abortion Law.” Catholic Weekly, Web.
Crummett, Dustin. “Violinists, Demandingness, and the Impairment Argument against Abortion.” Bioethics, vol. 34, no. 2, 2020, pp. 214-220.
Kruger, Gabrielle. “Cry of a unborn child.” 2017. Family Friend Poems. Web.
Scarfone, Mathew. “Incoherent Abortion Exceptions.” Journal of Social Philosophy, 2020, pp. 1-14.