Finn Clarke - Ethics Essay

Abortion Ethics

Throughout history, philosophers have debated over the most effective responses to ethical
issues present in society. Three prominent ethical theories of Deontology, Utilitarianism and
Virtue Theory have been developed to provide moral guidance in these ethical dilemmas. In
the theory of Deontology, 18th Century Philosopher Immanuel Kant proposes an objective
morality for humanity in which one must act from duty in accordance with certain principles
for an action to be deemed morally right. Contrastingly, Utilitarianism, conceived by
competing philosopher Jeremy Bentham and later refined by John Stuart Mill, considers the
consequences of actions and their societal utility. Aristotelian virtue ethics proposes a third
major normative ethical position, focusing on the propagation of a virtuous character, which
allowing one to act in a morally correct way in any given situation.

Abortion has been a contentious issue in society throughout time, prompting the
formulation of many philosophical arguments with contrasting views on whether it is
morally justifiable. In applying the three normative ethical theories to the issue of abortion
in the particular situation of an unplanned teenage pregnancy, Deontology condones
termination immoral while Utilitarianism and Virtue Theory assert a pro-choice stance. Due
to its intuitive appeal and consideration of context, I believe Utilitarianism most effectively
questions the morality of the abortion.

Kantian Deontology states that some actions, no matter the circumstances, are always
moral or immoral. This eludes to the implementation of objective principle, which provide
moral guidance to all actions, the application of which is one’s duty according to Kant. Kant
called this objective moral guide the categorical imperative, which deems the moral way to
act in any given situation. The categorical imperative is articulated in two main formulations:
Universability and the Golden Rule. Kant outlined his Universability principle in the
statement: “Act only according to that maxim which you can, at the same time, will that it
should become a universal law without contradiction.” Universability effectively acts as a
moral compass by causing people to question whether they would wish their actions to be
made universal, and, if not, then the action they are considering is immoral. Kant expresses

1
 Finn Clarke - Ethics Essay

a second formulation of the categorical imperative in his golden rule: “Act so that you treat
humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end, and never as
a mere means, that is, only for your own benefit without regard to their own desires.”
Through this statement, Kant articulates that humans, as rational and autonomous beings,
are ends in themselves and not a mere means to be used to an end. In applying the two
formulations of the categorical imperative to the issue of abortion, Kantian Deontology
would condone it immoral. The Universability principle tells us that killing an innocent
human being is immoral as it can never be universalised in a stable society. Therefore, as a
foetus is an unborn innocent human being, it is immoral to terminate a pregnancy. Similarly,
in applying Kant’s second formulation of the categorical imperative, deontologists may view
termination as using the death of the unborn infant as the means to the end of happiness
for the mother, also condoning abortion immoral. The strength of this Deontological
argument, is that it decisively distinguishes right from wrong, providing a clear set of
principles to follow. This elevates decisions above that of personal benefit, to moral justness,
where a termination cannot be used as a means, for example, to spite a former partner.
Despite these strengths, Kantian Deontology also has its weaknesses which are effectively
highlighted its application to the issue of abortion. One such foible is Kant’s definition of a
moral agent, where it is not stated the stage at which a conceived child is classed as such,
and whether this is at conception or at some point into the pregnancy. It also begs the
question of potentiality: should morality apply to a fertilised egg just because it has the
potential to be a human being? This argument functions via analogy: should a princess have
the privileges of a queen, just because she has the potential to become one in the future?

These weaknesses are addressed in the theory of Utilitarianism, which focuses on the
consequences of actions in relation to the maximisation of pleasure and minimisation of
pain. Conceived by Jeremy Bentham at a similar time to Kant, the theory measures the
morality of actions in the utility produced, not for the individual but for wider society.
Bentham summed this up in the principle: What is good is what leads to the greatest
happiness for the greatest number. Utilitarianism was further refined by John Stuart Mill,
and is recognised today in to main forms of the theory: Act and Rule. Act Utilitarianism is
the traditional form conceived by Bentham, in which the morality of an action is determined
by the utility it produces for the greatest number. While rule Utilitarianism generally applies

2
 Finn Clarke - Ethics Essay

this principle, it also aims to achieve a greater good for the long term. Applying Bentham’s
act Utilitarianism to the situation of an unplanned pregnancy for a sixteen-year-old,
utilitarians would support pro-choice abortion. In this case, the principle of the greatest
good for the greatest number deems termination just, due to the affect the birth may have
on the happiness of the parents. As a young couple, the parents may struggle to support an
infant physically, emotionally and financially, which would also put pressure on their close
community. One strength of utilitarian arguments is that they are situation related. For the
issue of abortion this is important, as the circumstances of the pregnancy could potentially
affect the physical health of the mother and child. In the situation of a teen pregnancy, the
utilitarian principle effectively considers the impact of an infant in relation to support, at
both an individual and societal level. However, a weakness of this approach is that the
future is unpredictable, and in assessing the greater good the theory makes assumptions
about the future that may be potentially erroneous.

Aristotle’s virtue theory contrasts greatly with Deontology and Utilitarianism, as the theory
is more focused on what constitutes a virtuous character rather than happiness or objective
moral guidelines. Aristotle believed that virtue is integral to human existence; in the same
way a knife that fulfils its function is one that cuts well, he believed that the purpose of life
as a human is to strive to be virtuous, a fulfilment of human function which he called
Eudaimonia. Aristotle defined virtue as ‘the mean point between two vices, one of excess
and the other of deficiency’, proposing that to act virtuously one must act in accordance
with the balance point between these two extremes. He developed this principle into a list
of vices and virtues with related spheres of action or feeling that can be applied to a given
situation to determine its morality. One example of this is the sphere of pain and pleasure,
which contains the vices of self-indulgence and insensibility and mean virtue of temperance.
This sphere may be used in the moral judgement of abortion, where a balance must be
found between an attitude of self-indulgence or insensibility in relation to the impact an
infant may have on a family. In the context of an unintentional teenage pregnancy, Virtue
Theory would deem termination a morally just action, due to the potential lack of support
for a child available from young parents, and their close community. A strength of this
Aristotelian technique, is its holistic approach in which context is considered at both a
societal and individual level. However, a weakness of the theory is that the mean principle is

3
 Finn Clarke - Ethics Essay

overly abstract, where interpretation and culture may have an influence on the moral
judgement produced.

All three normative ethical theories present convincing responses to the question of
whether abortion is morally just. However, due to their consideration of contextual factors
at both and individual and societal level, I believe the contentions of Utilitarianism and
Virtue Theory are more applicable to the situation of a teenage pregnancy than that of
Deontology. In comparing the drawbacks of these two theories, the abstract nature of
Virtue Theory makes it less effective at providing clear moral guidance. Although
Utilitarianism makes assumptions of the future, this weakness may not be a substantial
hindrance to the theory, as the amount of support available for an infant and the socio-
economic status of the parents are relatively predictable in the short term. Despite the
effectiveness of applying Utilitarian theory to the situation of an unplanned teen pregnancy,
both Deontology and Virtue Theory may be equally effective in other contexts regarding
termination or in application to the numerous other ethical issues present in society.