The Ethics of Abortion

English > Analysis
English > Comparison
Hot Topics > Abortion

A comparison of the arguments of Judith Thomson in "A Defense of Abortion," with those of Don Marquis in "Why Abortion is Immoral".

1,340 words () | 2 sources | MLA | 2007 United States

Paper Summary:

This paper compares and contrasts the respective arguments of Judith Thomson in "A Defense of Abortion," with those of Don Marquis in "Why Abortion is Immoral." The paper argues that while the two approaches to the question of abortion are distinct in their fundamental assumptions, in general both arguments are based on the same methodological premise that the complex ethical issues surrounding abortion can be understood through what may be termed a "property-rights" approach. The paper concludes that Marquis' argument is marginally stronger than Thomson's in this regard.

From the Paper:

"Thomson's analogy that for a mother to be compelled to carry a person she does not want for nine months - with the possibility of years of support following - is analogous to someone using one's property without permission is clearly very strong. It suggests that the self-defense argument is particularly strong, to the point of being almost unchallengeable. After all, if we defend the right of a person to defend his own life to the point of killing another if necessary, then why cannot the same rule apply to a mother. More broadly, why should a mother be forced to allow another person use of their property should they not wish this? In contrast, Marquis seems to emphasize the value of the property in this analysis. For the mother to terminate a fetus would be, in effect, the elimination of decades of life-value for the unborn fetus."

Sample of Sources Used:

Marquis, Don. "Why Abortion is Immoral." In Barbara MacKinnon. Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues Fifth Edition. Toronto: Thomson Wadsworth, 2007: 186-194.
Thomson, Judith. "A Defense of Abortion." In Barbara MacKinnon. Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues Fifth Edition. Toronto: Thomson Wadsworth, 2007: 175-183.