| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "JUDITH JARVIS THOMSON ABORTION": |
|
|
Judith Jarvis Thomson on Abortion, 2008.
A critique of Judith Jarvis Thomson's article "A Defense of Abortion".
1,395 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 22 sources, APA, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper comments upon Judith Jarvis Thomson's views on abortion in her article "A Defense of Abortion". The paper analyzes Thomson's arguments and beliefs about a woman's right to have an abortion, including her belief that abortion should be safe, legal, albeit rare. The paper concludes that Thomson's cautious and meticulous position is not unreasonable.
From the Paper
"To Thomson, this leads to a logical dilemma. If the pregnancy will kill the mother, why is it wrong to deny an abortion at the cost of the mother's life? She rejects the notion that killing the fetus (direct killing) is fundamentally different from allowing the mother to die. (190) Thomson reasons that if the woman managed to cause an abortion, she would not be charged with murder. She has a right to defend her life, even against the fetus in her womb. (189-91) From this, she reasons that if the woman unplugged the violinist, causing his death, she would not commit murder. If this is so, then to refuse to grant the rape victim the right to terminate a pregnancy is to refuse to grant her "that very status of person which is so firmly insisted on for the fetus.""
| |
|
"A Defense Of Abortion" ( Judith Jarvis Thomson ), 1999.
Analyzes arguments, methods and the effectiveness of this pro-abortion article.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 1 source, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The issue of abortion is perhaps the most divisive social and political issue in America today. Taking up this debate are two opposing armies of dedicated true-believers. On one side are those opposing abortion under any circumstances because they view it as the murder of an unborn child, and on the other side are those upholding the idea of choice as an absolute allowing the woman to secure an abortion without hindrance at any point in her pregnancy. Standing between these two extremes are millions of Americans with a more moderate view, a view that includes a concern for the trauma of the woman and an understanding that abortion is a choice not to be made lightly. These millions of Americans area also willing to allow some restrictions on abortions without banning the option altogether.
From the Paper
"The issue of abortion is perhaps the most divisive social and political issue in America today. Taking up this debate are two opposing armies of dedicated true-believers. On one side are those opposing abortion under any circumstances because they view it as the murder of an unborn child, and on the other side are those upholding the idea of choice as an absolute allowing the woman to secure an abortion without hindrance at any point in her pregnancy. Standing between these two extremes are millions of Americans with a more moderate view, a view that includes a concern for the trauma of the woman and an understanding that abortion is a choice not to be made lightly. These millions of Americans area also willing to allow some restrictions on abortions without banning the option altogether. The rigid positions of the two extremes are well-known because both are ..."
| |
|
Thomson's Allegory for Abortion Rights, 2008.
A review of the arguments presented in Judith Jarvis Thomson's article, "A Defense of Abortion."
839 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 20.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides the ethical background to Judith Jarvis Thomson's allegory of the violinist and the woman in regards to the right to life for pregnant mothers who need abortions in mortal circumstances. The paper discusses the arguments in Thomson's article, "A Defense of Abortion", and concludes that Thomson provides an ethically sound argument for abortion rights.
From the Paper
"In conclusion, the allegory of the violinist provides a rational and moral argument for abortion that takes the mother's life into account before the child within her. The immediate threat to life and the choice of keeping the mother alive is a valid argument, since she has not consciously disregard the child's life simply out of inconvenience. The premise of Thomson's logic resides on questioning the issue of murder for abortion, since the mother's life is just as valuable (if not more), than the unborn fetus that resides within her. In this manner, Thomson makes a rational and ethical argument through the premise of the violinist allegory in this article."
| |
|
Abortion, 2007.
An argument against Judith Jarvis Thomson's analogy for abortion, found in her article "A Defense of Abortion."
988 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the issue of abortion from the point of view of Judith Jarvis Thomson, found in her article "A Defense of Abortion." It discusses the issue by describing Thomson's hypothetical situation where a woman is essentially tethered to a famous violinist, who lives off the woman's organs. The paper argues against the logic used in Thomson's analogy, while still proposing that there may be circumstances where abortion should be legitimate.
From the Paper
"Perhaps we can all agree that no unborn baby ever reaches adult size and that, in many pregnancies, the baby's size does not become a significant obstruction until the very late stages of the pregnancy. In fact, at the six-month mark a typical fetus will only weigh about a pound and a half (Battle, 1982). And, certainly, pregnant women can be quite active. Many pregnant women exercise and even travel well into their pregnancies. The body has a natural mechanism for storing and carrying an unborn baby. And while we may all agree that carrying a nine-pound baby inside one's womb is not a simple task, we can also agree that the baby is not nine pounds for the vast majority of the pregnancy and that it is still a much easier task than having a grown adult plugged into one's kidneys. The situations, quite simply, are not analogous."
| |
|
Abortion, 2007.
An argument against Judith Jarvis Thomson's analogy for abortion, found in her article "A Defense of Abortion."
988 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the issue of abortion from the point of view of Judith Jarvis Thomson, found in her article "A Defense of Abortion." It discusses the issue by describing Thomson's hypothetical situation where a woman is essentially tethered to a famous violinist, who lives off the woman's organs. The paper argues against the logic used in Thomson's analogy, while still proposing that there may be circumstances where abortion should be legitimate.
From the Paper
"Perhaps we can all agree that no unborn baby ever reaches adult size and that, in many pregnancies, the baby's size does not become a significant obstruction until the very late stages of the pregnancy. In fact, at the six-month mark a typical fetus will only weigh about a pound and a half (Battle, 1982). And, certainly, pregnant women can be quite active. Many pregnant women exercise and even travel well into their pregnancies. The body has a natural mechanism for storing and carrying an unborn baby. And while we may all agree that carrying a nine-pound baby inside one's womb is not a simple task, we can also agree that the baby is not nine pounds for the vast majority of the pregnancy and that it is still a much easier task than having a grown adult plugged into one's kidneys. The situations, quite simply, are not analogous."
| |
|
The Issue of Abortion and Abortion Law, 2001.
This paper examines the issues of abortion and abortion law
6,015 words (approx. 24.1 pages), 20 sources, £ 98.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines various aspects of abortion and abortion law such as social and ethical concerns as well as the law, and more specifically concerned to that of women's rights.
From the paper:
"While medical science is making abortion much safer for the woman, the debates and the legal battles continue unabated. In the United States, the battles rage in the courts, the Congress and state legislatures. There have even been violent confrontations in the clinics where abortions are performed. There are people in favor of giving the woman the right to abort, and people who are not prepared to allow abortion except when it puts the life of the mother in danger. In between these two extreme positions, we have people taking intermediate positions."
| |
|
The Ethics of Abortion, 2007.
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 (approx. 5.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
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."
| |
|
"A Defense of Abortion", 2000.
A critique of Judith Thomson's essay "A Defense of Abortion".
1,320 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how, in "A Defense of Abortion," Judith Thomson argues that the assumption that a fetus has a right to life does not automatically imply that abortion is in all cases immoral. A person is not obligated to use her own body to sustain the life of another even if refusing would mean death for the other person, such as in the hypothetical case of a violinist that has been involuntarily attached to your kidneys in order to save his life. It also looks at how Thomson argues that the violinist is like a fetus that is the result of a rape, and the mother thus has no obligation to continue to sustain the life of the fetus, regardless of whether the fetus is a person and has a right to life.
From the Paper
"Brody makes a distinction between not being obligated to save someone's life and being able to take their life. In the case of abortion, while it is true that the mother is not obligated to sustain the life of the fetus, it is not morally permissible for her to kill it either. However, since there is no way for a person to not save a fetus without also killing it, I fail to see the logic in making this distinction. In either case, the fetus, and the violinist, are dead; whether you look at it as not saving a life or actually taking a life is irrelevant. I agree that in many cases the two are distinct and should definitely be treated differently, but in the case of abortion the distinction is meaningless. "
| |
|
Abortion: An Ethical Issue, 2002.
This essay discusses the ethical dilemna that the abortion issue presents using the arguments of three philosophers, Judith Jarvis-Thompson, Mary Anne Warren and Don Marquis to analytically discuss and debate each of their individual positions.
4,083 words (approx. 16.3 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 75.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Examined here is the seemingly intractable debate that has garnered much debate and philosophical discourse. Is abortion unethical? If so, on what grounds? Does a fetus have an unquestionable right to life? The arguments of three philosphers, Thompson, Warren, and Marquis attempt to construe argument devoid of appeal to religious sources. Actual logical arguments are put forth and then dissected by the author. Instruction of Informal fallacies also included, as well as topics such as debate through analogies, Criteria of Personhood, and Potentiality theories: FLO theory.
From the Paper
"First let us begin with an argument derived from the article by Judith Jarvis-Thompson entitled, ?A Defense of Abortion.? She starts of with explaining the common pro-life argument, which relies heavily on the premise that a fetus is a human being and a person at the moment of conception. While examining the continuous expectancy that the fetus constantly develops into a child, she from this judges that to draw a line of personhood from this point or another is to exemplify the argument with an arbitrary carelessness. She makes no attempt to refute a fetus as a person or otherwise. To do so she deems as participation in a ?slippery-slope argument.? Thompson acknowledges that the fetus is a human well before it?s birth, for it would be biologically unsound to state otherwise. Based on her take of the anti-abortionist?s argument an acorn (a potential oak tree) would be viewed in the same way as an Oak tree is, even though that this is an incorrect and rather crude observation. From this basis, she says on cannot make a good examination until a better counter-argument is examined and then she says we will have more sufficient grounds on which to reject it or not."
| |
|
Critique of A Defense of Abortion, 2005.
A critique of essay "A Defense of Abortion."
1,380 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 1 source, APA, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is a critique of the essay "A Defense of Abortion" by Judith Jarvis Thomson. It analyzes Thomson's agreement with abortion opponents that a fetus is a person. It also discusses the competing rights to life issue of fetus and pregnant woman. The paper examines Thomson's contention that women have the right to control their bodies.
From the Paper
"In her essay titled A Defense of Abortion Judith Jarvis Thomson grants abortion opponents' argument that a fetus is a person from the moment of conception ..."
| |
|
Abortion, 2002.
Examines the issue within the context of two articles by Judith Thomson and Don Marquis.
1,245 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 3 sources, APA, £ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Judith Thomson's article "A Defence of Abortion" where she states her opinion that some abortions are permissible and that fetuses are not human beings at the moment of conception. It then compares it to Don Marquis "Why Abortion is Immoral" in which he claims the opposite - that abortions are always impermissible and that fetuses are human beings from the moment of conception because they have a future. The author then shows, in the bulk of the paper, why he agrees with Thomson?s argument.
From the Paper
"This leads me to believe that if a woman has an unwanted pregnancy, she has a right to end it before the fetus is viable, because the fetus?s life is dependent on the life of the biological mother. For example, if the mother were to incur a fatal injury before the fetus is viable the fetus would die, but if the baby is viable the baby could survive whether the mother lives or not. This is the first point in my opinion - that the fetus?s future is able to be controlled by someone other than the biological mother. Before this point the mother has a right to do what she wants, because it is a part of her body and if the baby is unwanted, she is not doing anything morally wrong, because she is not hurting any person but herself. After the point where the baby is viable, it is morally wrong to have an abortion because that is a form of murder."
| |
|
Post-Abortion, 2005.
This paper discusses abortion, especially the post abortion period, from the aspects of the Christian church.
2,035 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, £ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, in the view of the church, abortion is possibly one of the most vivid instances of a circumstance where something is legitimate in this contemporary period but is viewed as committing a sin against God. The author points out that the Church declares that the victims of abortion are both the woman and her child because the demise of a child is one of the severest moments of strain a person can bear in life; therefore post-abortion syndrome is the emotional trauma of not lamenting and not allowing oneself to experience the agony and suffering that goes with the bereavement. The paper states that the Law of God divulges the sin of both partners and they feel at fault and immense grief, the church controls individuals who persistently experience the saddle of the sin of abortion by repeatedly indicating them to the cross of their Lord Jesus.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Church on Abortion
Church on Psychological and Physical Post-Abortion Sequelae
Conclusion
From the Paper
"However, in case of some women, the strain post-abortion is linked with eating problems like overindulgence in eating, bulimia, and anorexia nervosa. Abortion is connected with greater depression, aggressive conduct, alcohol and drug abuse, and surrogate pregnancies, and lower maternal linkage with children who are born thereafter. These causes are strongly linked with child abuse and will seem to corroborate stray clinical evaluations connecting post-abortion pain with subsequent child abuse. It has been seen that post-abortion couples have increased chances of divorcing or undergoing separation. Several post-abortion women develop an increased problem forming long-term relationships with a male partner."
| |
|
Abortion Rights, 2007.
This paper provides an analysis of the sociology of abortion and looks at abortion rights among women.
2,269 words (approx. 9.1 pages), 8 sources, APA, £ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer maintains that the subject of abortion requires exploration into multiple moral, social and religious values. The writer points out that some may argue that abortion also requires an exploration of political views and legal perspectives, as the concept and subject is often shaped by multiple dynamics including those in the political realm. This paper reviews the subject of abortion from a sociological standpoint, arguing that women should be allowed the right to an abortion. The writer concludes that a woman's right to an abortion should be upheld and that women should be afforded the opportunity to make the decision they feel is best for them and their family when it comes to their body and their privacy.
Outline:
Introduction
History of the Problem
Discussion Present Situation
Opinion
Conclusions and Summary
References
From the Paper
"The subject of abortion is one that has long been argued among politicians, sociologists, humanists and citizens. Controversial because it involves one's definitions of life and values as a human, the subject of abortion is one that legal analysts have reviewed over decades. Ultimately however, the subject of abortion is one that rests on a woman's right to privacy. As a woman's "right" to privacy is a right upheld by the law, one can only assume that a woman should be guaranteed that right under the law. Because abortion involves one's personal decisions affecting their bodies, it is important that sociologists, psychologists and legal analysts avoid applying political idealisms to the subject of abortion, and rather consider the subject of abortion based on value systems and beliefs."
| |
|
Ethics and Abortion, 2002.
An indepth exploration of both sides of the abortion debate.
2,646 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 17 sources, MLA, £ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Almost three decades after the landmark 1973 Roe vs. Wade case legalizing abortion in America, the issue remains the greatest moral flashpoint facing America today. This paper examines the underlying ethical arguments of both sides of the abortion debate, using Ronald Dworkin?s ?sanctity of life? principles. By ?abortion,? this paper includes all forms of abortion, from early fetal abortion through the RU46 drug to late-term abortions, from abortions out of ?convenience? to abortions in cases of rape and incest. It evaluates how the anti-abortion crusade has framed their campaign on the personhood and the rights of the fetus. The second part looks at the pro-abortion movement, which has framed their issue as a campaign for women?s reproductive rights. Finally, the paper examines the approach of a minority of women, activists from both camps who are working to bridge the gap between pro- and anti-abortion factions.
By presenting both sides, this paper argues that because of current societal structures that make unwanted pregnancy more likely to happen and its consequences more difficult to assume, abortion must remain an option, a ?necessary evil.? Both pro- and anti-abortion factions, however, must work towards their common ground ? a society where abortions are no longer necessary.
From the Paper
"Despite the legality of abortion and its importance to women?s rights, anti-abortion activists have successfully curtailed several pro-choice gains. More important, the ?pro-life? camp?s appeals to a higher moral law have successfully placed pro-choice advocates on the defensive.
However, pro-choice advocates also frame their stand on morality. Forcing a woman to continue and unwelcome pregnancy is ultimately harmful to the mother and the child. The creation of unwanted and uncared-for children has a two-fold effect of limiting a woman?s potential for both the present and future motherhood. As Roiphe states, becoming a mother is a crucial choice and its imposition makes women into ?slaves of their biology? (142)."
|
|
|
