As examples, researchers turn away dozens of monkey babies from their mothers in order to cause these small creatures a mental trauma, deprivation and most of them do not see their mothers any more. These monkey babies are confused and suffer from fear, helplessness, anxiety what is more it leads to diarrhea, hair loss and self-mutilation. In one shocking test, the scientists put a monkey mother with its baby into the one cage, but the monkey mother was under sleeping pills. The baby was in deprivation, screaming and trying to wake up its mother. Another cruel experiments on animals are carried out in military training exercises. Training instructors break and cut off the limbs of live goats and pigs and what is more sometimes trainers put
Understanding Infanticide in Context
Michelle Oberman’s article, Understanding Infanticide in Context: Mothers Who Kill, 1870 – 1930 and Today, focuses on the social facts in America in regards to the mother figure. Breaking down this concept, Oberman provides the readers with two labels, infanticide and neonaticide. Both fall under the umbrella definition of, killing one’s own child/children. What separates this two labels is that neomaticide is, “.babies who were killed within the first twenty-four hours of life”(Oberman). Infanticide is a more general term that encompasses the, “death of infants any time after the first twenty-four hours” (Oberman).
Abortion is a commonly talked about subject, but infanticide is not brought up nearly as often. Infanticide is the killing of a child who is less than a year old, often by his or her own parents. There are a few different forms of infanticide, and the ones that will be discussed in this essay are partial-birth abortion, direct infanticide, and indirect infanticide.
In the article, “Of Primates and Personhood: Will According Rights and “Dignity” to Nonhuman Organisms Halt Research?”, author Ed Yong demonstrates the process of attempting rights for nonhuman creatures. He begins to create his claim by mentioning the Great Ape Project, and how much they have struggled so much with establishing rights for certain creatures that they just began to focus only on apes. Yong continues with the notions of others having a great dislike towards ape rights but makes a point by mentioning they are the most similar animals to us than any other. It seems that the US is the one to blame for stopping the rights but many continue to argue that they know how to protect each one and another, just as humans. His purpose is
Human infants display the same characteristics of animals, they are both innocent and cannot refuse what is happening to them. Although experimenting on human infants is wrong in a society, animals or non-humans would argue for equality. Singer explains, “The basic principle of equality, is equality of consideration, and equal consideration for different beings may lead to different treatment and different rights” (Singer 531). Equality can be defined as the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, and opportunities. Singer argues that when it comes to experimenting on animals and non-humans they have different rights when it comes to human infants. Singer explains, “It is an implication of this principle of equality that our concern for others ought not to depend on what they are like, or what abilities they possess – although precisely what this concern requires us to do many vary according to the characteristics of those affected by what we do”
Nelson, V. S. (1978). Infanticide and the value of life. (pp. 100-105). Buffalo, NY: Wiley Subscription Services.
In certain cases, the fetuses have relatively severe disorders such that death is obvious prior to or immediately after birth (Lopez 517). Examples of such cases include anencephaly, whereby the brain happens to be missing together with the limb-body wall complex whereby some organs are formed outside the body’s cavity. In that regard, they consider it as being cruel to compel women to carry such pregnancies to full term. Additionally, even with the nonfatal conditions, like the Down syndrome, it is more likely that the parents may not be in the position of caring for the severely disabled child. In addition, they assert that there is no any need of letting a baby get into this world unwanted. This is due to the fact that siring a child is a vital decision which requires not only consideration but also preparation, as well as, planning. Research indicates that unwanted pregnancies are linked with maternal depression, birth defects, lower education attainment, lower rates of breastfeeding, and a higher risk of infant abuse (Bostdorff 301). Additionally, the pro-choice supporters allege that ladies who are prevented from securing abortions are likely to remain unemployed, survive on public welfare, live below poverty line, as well as, become domestic violence victims. Besides, majority of the women who opt to abort their
The author here raises the ethical question about the Baby Theresa case notably; is it acceptable to sacrifice a life with no prospects for a future in order to save another life or several other lives? The author seems to point to the possible altruistic act on the part of the parents in having the baby’s life ended before her life would have ended surely and eventually anyway due to a rare and fatal condition with no possibility of recovery or reversal of this fate. Many physicians agreed with the parents and they recognized the need for organs for other infants, who might otherwise perish. Professional “ethicists” did not agree with this decision and used basic philosophical tenets to hold no life as more important than the life of another. As well, Florida law was on the side of these ethicists and law did no allow for the newborn’s organs to be harvested before natural death occurred. The problem here was that the newborn was going to die anyway and when she did nine days later, the organs had deteriorated to the point of being of no use to other newborns in need. However there are other questions as to the motives of the parents and the doctors, as well as the stance of most of the ethicists that align with the law.
Most people know about abortion, but many people do not know about infanticide. Infanticide is defined as "the crime of killing a child" (dictionary.cambridge.org), typically under a year of age. Infanticide could be described as abortion's partner in crime, as it is often the second option. This essay will explain why infanticide can be called abortion's partner in crime, the reasons parents may kill their children, and why the crime is not justified.
Even pro-choice advocates disagree on the circumstances that validate abortion. There is little or no argument against the current abortion of fetuses with genes for Down Syndrome. I speculate that controversy would ensue if the abortion of fetuses with fatal but less debilitating diseases, such as diabetes, became commonplace. I propose the following question: what makes a genetic disease or disability severe enough to validate selective abortion of an affected fetus? Pernick discusses the meaning of health, indicating that an individual who is unable to complete a physical or mental task that others can do has a disability. If people with below-average IQ have low probability of obtaining jobs with above-average salaries in spite of their efforts, are they unhealthy (Lemonick 57-8)? In our society, are homosexuals considered diseased (Henry 3,6)? Is an ugly person who cannot find a mate, in a sense, disabled? The abortion of individuals who do not exhibit desirable aesthetic traits may seem extreme. However, with no laws regulating such abortions, I speculate that some would take place. Because I believe that unwanted children should not be born regardless of their health status, I do not propose laws that disallow abortions of fetuses deemed healthy by medical standards. Instead, I propose laws regulating pre-natal screening. We should only screen embryos and fetuses for 'abortion-worthy' diseases. These "abortion-worthy" diseases should be designated by a national bioethics committee not unlike the one currently headed by Kass (Gibbs). While every condition should be analyzed independently, all should have common, identifying characteristics.