Abortion poses significant ethical concerns for Australia’s legislature and medical professionals, which both support and oppose the legalisation of abortion. For the legislature criminalising abortion would likely violate public ethics through its negative consequences for the Australian people. As elected public representatives, members of the Australian legislature are held to a particular ethical standard. At the core of this standard is the obligation to legislate in the interest of the public. As such, passing legislation harmful to the Australian public would be an ethical violation. Criminalising abortion would represent such a violation. Pertinent to this question is the public policy theory of economist Bruce Yandle, dubbed the ‘Bootlegger …show more content…
Currently, abortion is a crime under New South Wales (NSW) and Queensland statute law. The NSW Crimes Act 1900, section 82 decrees: “Whosoever, being a woman with child, unlawfully administers to herself any drug or noxious thing, or unlawfully uses any instrument or other means, with intent in any such case to procure her miscarriage, shall be liable to imprisonment for ten years.” Section 83 denotes the same, however references doctors rather than pregnant women. Sections 224 and 225 of Queensland’s Criminal Code 1899 echo identical sentiments. Later rulings in Australian courts have set a precedent more liberal than the statute law, however. In NSW, the ‘Levine Ruling’ from R v. Wald decreed that abortion was lawful if “...the accused had an honest belief on reasonable grounds that what they did was necessary to preserve the woman involved from serious danger to their life, or physical or mental health...”. Similarly, Queensland’s ‘Maguire Ruling’ in R v Bayliss and Cullen deferred to Victoria’s ‘Menhennitt Ruling’ in R v Davidson. Justice Menhennitt ruled in Davidson that abortion was lawful if the defendant “...believed on reasonable grounds that the act done by him was (a) necessary to preserve the woman from a serious danger to her life or her physical or mental health (not being merely the normal dangers of pregnancy and childbirth)...”. Despite these rulings, it is still necessary to amend state legislation and remove abortion from the criminal code. Case law (as in Wald, Davidson, and Bayliss) is primarily relied upon by the Australian judiciary. However, it is too flexible and interpretive to exist independently, and thus is counterbalanced by the rigidity of statute law (as in the Crimes Act 1900). Because of this, Australian statute law and case law on abortion must be
Anger and heated debate have long fueled the controversy over abortion. Whether pro-life or pro-choice, both sides of the argument are convinced of the righteousness of their beliefs. There is, however, some confusion surrounding the term “pro-choice” – it does not directly pertain to the spread and use of abortion, but rather, “pro-choicers” advocate the continued legalization of abortion in order to make the choice available and to ensure that women’s fundamental rights are not subjugated. The stance that abortion should be available has its roots in economic concerns, psychological evidence, moral dilemmas, and the Constitution.
Instead, the court recognized that the right to abortion was guaranteed under personal privacy. Thus, any law regulating abortion in any state across the United States was supposed to be justified by stating any of the compelling state interests. Additionally, any legislative enactment set forth should be tailored in meeting the compelling interests of all parties. The judges also agreed that the right to abortion was unlimited; therefore, it was important for the court to determine a framework that would balance the right to abortion and those of the government (Stewart et al. 307). The latter sought to protect the rights of all mothers and at the same time protect the human life. If the abortion law was completely unregulated, then there would be cases where individuals would practice abortion without factoring the important role of government in conserving life (Saad). As a result, the trimester framework that took the above issues into consideration was conceived. The framework established when the fundamental rights of women to issues relating abortion became absolute. It also established when the state's interests were more compelling than the rights of the woman. In the first trimester, the Court left the decision to the woman and the physicians. However, after the first trimester or at the end of the first trimester when fetal viability had been established, the state had a right to protect the health of the mother as well as the unborn child (Saad). The state was also required to regulate all abortion procedures so that they became reasonable. The procedures were supposed to protect and preserve maternal health. At the third trimester, the state interest would become compelling since the viability of the fetus becomes compelling. In such cases, the state has the right to regulate abortion to protect human life. Also, the
woman can have. Knowing that if you brought a child into the world and you
For many years in Canada and many other countries abortion has been a topic of debate. In Canada, there has been no legislation regarding abortions since 1988 as the previous laws were said to violate women’s Charter rights under Section 7 which states that Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Due to this, the Supreme Court of Canada considered abortion legislation to be a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Since then, no legislations regarding abortion has been changed. Joyce Arthur, executive director of the Abortion Rights Coalition
Over the duration of the last century, abortion in the Western hemisphere has become a largely controversial topic that affects every human being. In the United States, at current rates, one in three women will have had an abortion by the time they reach the age of 45. The questions surrounding the laws are of moral, social, and medical dilemmas that rely upon the most fundamental principles of ethics and philosophy. At the center of the argument is the not so clear cut lines dictating what life is, or is not, and where a fetus finds itself amongst its meaning. In an effort to answer the question, lawmakers are establishing public policies dictating what a woman may or may not do with consideration to her reproductive rights. The drawback, however, is that there is no agreement upon when life begins and at which point one crosses the line from unalienable rights to murder.
“Any American born after 1973 is a survivor of legalized abortion” (“Abortion”). This quote struck me because of its frankness. After it was legalized, many women had an option to abort their pregnancy against the Catholic Church’s wishes. Any child that was born after that year could have been aborted. This shows that many of the people that are living today could have been killed simply because the mother did not want them and they were considered to not be living in the womb. Being here today, many people survived the mass murder that is abortion and still continues today. The Church urges every mother to think about the morals and laws that God has sent to us. “You shall not kill” (Exodus 20:13). This includes the fetus in the womb that has been alive since conception. The views of the Church and the views of society fight against each other constantly. Abortion is the killing of a human being and is accepted by modern society despite it being against the teachings of the Church and moral good.
Since the Darwinian Revolution of the 19th century our society has turned upside down. Everything under the sun had become questionable, the origin of life, how we came to be, where are we headed and what to do in the here all became questions in life. But one of the greatest impacts of this new age thinking is its effect on our Old World values. Western societies values, morals and ethics became debatable, with some people striving for change and others clinging for stability. Battle lines had been drawn and the Liberals and Conservatives were ready to duke it out on a number of issues. One of these debates centers on a woman?s right to have and abortion. According to the Webster?s dictionary and abortion is defined as a miscarry, something misshapen or unnatural. An abortion is a procedure in which an embryo or fetus is prohibited from developing by artificial means. One could argue that this is next to murder. How can we as a society sanction the murdering of developing babies? Also it can equally be stated that abortion is unnatural and a health hazard to women who have undergone the procedure. Whatever the case, abortion should be outlawed because it is immoral and mothers should face the responsibilities of their actions. Many arguments can be used in order to put an end to abortion or at least in order to establish dialogue. One of the oldest arguments against abortion is the religious standpoint. Western society (Canada & U.S.A.) is historically a Judeo-Christian culture with Judeo-Christian values. Although in recent times we have become an increasingly pluristic society the Old World thinking is still at the heart of our social relations and laws. The Bible says ?Thou shalt not kill? thus prohibiting people from harming others or themselves. Abortion and its advocates violate this law. They seek to change one of the most fundamental values of our society. Pro-choice under this stance is equated with murder and ?playing God?. One may raise the question, how can a minority inflict its views of the majority? According to Francis X. Meenan, this is a false assumption. He goes on to claim that those who favor abortion on demand are the real minority (Bender & Leone, 97). He also claims that the issue of abortion is a moral debate and cannot be settled by numbers. So even if pro-choice advocates outnumbered pro-life advocates, this would prove or...
In our society, there are many ethical dilemmas that we are faced with that are virtually impossible to solve. One of the most difficult and controversial issues that we are faced with is abortion. There are many strong arguments both for and against the right to have an abortion which are so complicated that it becomes impossible to resolve. The complexity of this issue lies in the different aspects of the argument. The essence of a person, rights, and who is entitled to these rights, are a few of the many aspects which are very difficult to define. There are also issues of what circumstances would justify abortion. Because the issue of abortion is virtually impossible to solve, all one can hope to do is understand the different aspects of the argument so that if he or she is faced with that issue in their own lives, they would be able to make educated and thoughtful decisions in dealing with it.
As one knows, some unwanted pregnancies could often be harmful and distressing for a woman. Women should have the right over their body to choose to sustain the fetus or not. In the past decades, women did not have their freedom of abortion in many countries of the world. There have always been controversies going on about abortion. Each individual has dissimilar views on the legality of abortion. Some people are against abortion for personal religious purposes and beliefs. For those who don’t believe in abortion, it is because they see it as killing a fetus, which is a human being. Others support abortion because they believe in women’s rights. Laws of abortion vary in each country, and abortion is not legal all over the world. It is illegal under any conditions but only permitted to save woman’s life if in countries such as Brazil, Nigeria, United Arab Emirates, and Ireland. However, abortion is legal without any restrictions in countries like Canada, Albania, and Italy. It the past decades Abortion was considered as criminal act in Canada. “If an abortion was carried out without such approval, the woman was liable for imprisonment for 2 years, an...
Abortion is arguably the most controversial topic in all the issues revolving around reproduction. Women of all different races, classes, and religions have been practicing abortion since before the colonial era in America. The laws pertaining to abortion have changed many times, adding and removing discrepancies and stipulations throughout many years, and still to this day. The views of abortion in society during different time periods have also changed and adapted. At the time of Sarah Grosvenor’s decision to abort, the laws pertaining to abortion did not make the act fully illegal. However in years after Grosvenor’s case abortion was outlawed. The law played a minor part in women’s decisions to have an abortion, however society, and gender played the most prominent role in the decision of abortion.
The child could have a serious disorder from something such as the Zika virus and that child or the mother of the child should not be emotionally put through that. I can see the points made by the Pro-live such as abortion is murder, but abortion will most likely stay legalised in most Australian states like it is currently, and it will most likely stay that way. There are variables that could affect her choice. She could be poor, the child could have a birth defect, and so on. Giving her a right to decide whether she should abort the baby it’s entirely her choice. What if the mother was raped or she got pregnant from incest. Would you traumatise this mother with the child of the rapist for 9 months, and would you allow an inbred child that will most likely have a disability and be put through literal
Baird, Robert M., and Stuart E. Rosenbaum. The Ethics of Abortion: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1989. Print.
It is almost unanimously agreed upon that the right to life is the most important and sacred right possessed by human beings. With this being said, it comes as no surprise that there are few issues that are more contentious than abortion. Some consider the process of abortion as immoral and consisting of the deprivation of one’s right to life. Others, on the opposite end of the spectrum, see abortion as a liberty and a simple exercise of the right to the freedom of choice.
The ethical issue I will be going over is Abortion in New Zealand. An Abortion is a medical procedure to end a pregnancy. Abortion is an ethical issue because it’s controversial, it is literally a life or death situation. There are some strong views on the topic of abortion in today's society, whether it is right or wrong. Abortion statistics show that in 2003 18,511 abortions were performed on women. Todays abortion statistics show that 12,823 abortions were performed in New Zealand, 332 (3%) fewer than in 2015 (13,155).(4) So the abortion rates are currently going down. The law around Abortion in New Zealand is legal with the agreement of two certifying doctors. There
In my argumentative coursework I am arguing that abortion is wrong and not to be mistaken with 'Abortion should be made illegal.' I will explain later why I have made this statement. Abortion is the termination of an unborn child in its mother's womb for up to twenty four weeks of the pregnancy or in special circumstances e.g. Disability diagnosis a termination right up until the mother goes in to labour. I think the above definition is an easier and less harsh way of saying that abortion is the murdering of a human being. There are several reasons why abortion is legal and several reasons why it shouldn?t be.