Abortion and Infanticide Michael Tooley - Term Paper Example

Abortion and Infanticide Michael Tooley In his article Abortion and Infanticide Michael Tooley argues that embryos, fetuses and very young infants do not have a right to life due to their failure to satisfy “the self consciousness requirement.” Argument of Tooley’s In the year 1972, Micheal Tooley has written the article ‘Abortion and Infanticide’. This article covered various aspects of abortion and infanticide from the Tooley’s perspective. The essay dealt with the morality issue of abortion and infanticide and questioned based on moral principles. These moral principles defined the basic rights of life. The author compared human fetus and infants to the adult members of various species like dogs, cats, polar bears and others and argued over the right to life issue. The author points out the morally relevant difference of newborn baby and earlier stage of development of human being. There are different views over the issue of abortion among the conservative view and others. Tooley argues that abortion issue differs from moral issue as it appears in extreme positions from conservative point of view of looking at it as person. In the case where is not identified as a person than how it can be wrong in destroying it. Tooley explains infanticide from emotional angle and regards it receiving the similar reaction from the society as it does in the cases linked with taboos of masturbation or oral sex in the past. However the response to the infanticide is much stronger. Tooley differentiates the terms person and human beings and regards person to be a moral concept. He explained the arguments of Roger Wertheimer in the opposition of abortion as Wertheimer used the term human being and person interchangeably and explained that from the moment of conception a fetus is a human being or a person. Tooley further compared the issue of abortion to the issue o Negro slavery. Tooley agrees to the same and draws the similar meaning from the term human being and person. The argument goes further in justifying that a person means right to life. Tooley discusses that the strength of life with the simple explanation of being self conscious entity is incomplete as it will qualify all the animals in our everyday life to be person who are getting murdered for our preferences i.e. “Once one reflects upon the question of the basic moral principles involved in the ascription of a right to life to organisms, one may find himself driven to conclude our everyday treatment of animals is morally indefensible, and that we are in fact murdering innocent persons. ” (33) There have been three counterexamples of the claims of rights and desired in which desire can be absent due to emotional disturbance, it can be of a situation of temporarily unconscious of a previously conscious person or it can be absent due to manipulation. The arguments of morality can be different from each of the case. Tooley reinforces the need to have a demarking line where infanticide can have a clear cut off point. There should be a line that can guide people to the safer side of the morality. Objection to Tooley’s Article Arp and Mahaffey explain the definition of person to be the one with the capacity of being rational or have intelligence, mental states on the issues like beliefs, desires, emotions and self awareness is strong and robust; use language, involved in relationships with other people and is morally responsible for one’s actions (54). Tooley’s essay treats the issue of abortion and infanticide with vulnerable way for understanding of the definition of person being a self conscious entity. A fetus or infant can not be compared with animals or any other living beings as animals or animal babies do not have the similar potential of developing as a person to qualify on this definition. There are different definitions and circumstances of abortion. In medical terms, the life starts from the moment embryo is formed and it grows everyday to become similar to the miniature form of a person. Self consciousness requirement is the base for all the arguments Tooley’s essay. However definition of person, its meaning and applicability is much more than that. An animal is also self conscious, but animal rights can not be compared with human rights. Humans have higher rights than animals for being on the topmost level of the food chain. This also gives higher rights to the human people and children which can not be compared with the animal or animal baby’s right. The potential of fetus to become the self-conscious individual and part of a healthy society provides it all the rights an adult can have. On the other hand, the role of human infant is much higher in the society due to the emotional aspect linked to it. Tooley agreed to this aspect in the article. There are various emotional dimensions attached to the human infant. It adds and increases the ladder of relationship one has, it gives more responsibilities to its parents to nurture in new life and make it part of the society. Similarly Chawick has argued on the quality of babies desired by the parents. The economic cost of abnormal babies to the society is high as well as it increases the chances of wrong genes to be carried forward to the next generation. The results would be lower quality of life. In some of the cases, the lifelong sufferings for a disable child and parents grows with time in the case the disability are permanent. Other issue is the care available to the child once the caretaker is not available for caring. These might have been the arguments which have made the abortion morally acceptable in different societies. Regarding the right of fetus, the fetus is part of mother’s body unless it is delivered. Any right during this period needs to be the subject of mother’s right as an individual. Medically and legally in many countries, abortion is allowed when pregnancy risks mother’s life. Abortion in many countries is allowed till specified stage of development, usually the first trimester. At the same time, infanticide is regarded as heinous crime in almost all the countries. A child born is subject to proper nourishing and caring so that it can develop as a part of the society. It is vulnerable and week and requires care from its caretakers, guardians and parents. Conclusion The issue of morals is all about the internal sense of a person. This is forms in various ways. Irrespective of what academic definition is given to the rights of a fetus and an infant, the moral aspect of the infanticide and abortion will differ from society to society and from time to time. Self conscious requirement can not be the only basis of determining the right of an infant or a fetus. Infanticide and abortion are two different things altogether and needs to be treated differently. However self consciousness of an entity can not be the only determining factor of its right to life. Reference: Arp and Mahaffey “And They Have a Plan: Cylons” as Persons in Eberl, J T (2008) Battlestar Galactica and philosophy: knowledge here begins out there, John Wiley and Sons, 2008 retrieved on20 April 2011 from Google Books database Chadwick, R. F. Ethis, Reproduction and Genetic Control, Routledge, 1990 available at Google Books Database Tooley, M. Abortion and Infanticide, Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 37-65, Princeton University Press, 1972 Read More