Customer Description: This should be a multi paragraph paper in which you state your case, pro or con. The personal feelings are valid, but should be backed up with specific details or examples to support the opinion. 

Paper Body:

Annually in the world artificial interruptions of pregnancy are made from 36 up to 53 millions women, i.e. each year an abortion is made with 4 % of all women in the age of 15-44 years old. Among problems of health any does not cause so much polemic as a problem of an abortion. There, where the abortion is legal, there will be always desire to make it illegal and on the contrary. The statistics testifies, that in many countries, where the abortion is legislatively solved, its frequency is considerably lower, than in the countries, it is completely for-bidden. 

Anything does not influence health of the women so as an abortion, and at the same time anything was not influenced by religious, moral and political factors in such measure. Many social, medical, psychological, legal and economic questions are connected to a problem of an abortion. But in this essay I want to allocate ethical aspects of interruption of pregnancy. There are two basic opposite points of view in a society and in environment of the experts:

1) The abortion is an especially personal intimate problem, which does not concern anybody, except for the woman and in which nobody should interfere. It is simple one of medical operations, and as in a case with any surgical operation all problems are permitted between the doctor and patient. If absolutely shortly to express this point of sight, it is possible to say so: "the Abortion is a medical problem". 

2) The second point of view represents an opposite pole: the abortion offends moral feeling and consequently there is an ethical problem here, and thus - most serious one. You see, before to reach the doctor the women solves a moral problem: the life or death of the future person, and after she has addressed to the doctor, the ethical sense not only does not disappear, but becomes more complicated, as the third man is involved in its decision, and if he acts as the doctor, he becomes the accomplice of murder. Yes, murder, because as against any other surgical operation this one has the special purpose - to destroy life, to kill a human essence, completely defenseless, innocently suffering.

Between two these extreme points of view a problem field also lays, on which the drama opposition and collision of various positions, points of view, approaches, and estimations are developed. These collisions are so sharp and dramatic, that they become a subject of manifestations, meetings, demonstrations: one of demonstrations on a problem of an abortion, for example, which past in 1992 in Washington, has collected over 250 thousand participants. 

The problem of an abortion is at the center of ethical discussions already more than 20 years. To consider essence of the different points of view, it is necessary first of all to be released from consideration of an abortion as insoluble ethical problem and to study, what arguments are resulted in modern ethics to prove their sanction and admissibility from the moral point of view, and what are used to achieve prohibition and inadmissibility. 

As the main argument of the opponents of an abortion the position can be considered, that the germ is a human essence, and as the right on life is the integral right of each man, he has it too. For the benefit of this position ancient east tradition speaks to consider the age not from birthday and since the day of conceiving. However there are scientific facts that in a human germ already in 9 week age there is a differentiation of the basic bodies and systems, moreover already in a gene the certain features of the person of the man are programmed. 

Hence, the abortion cannot be justified under any circumstances. But there are internal distinctions within that point of view. The supporters of an extreme position do not recognize any exceptions. They consider, that the abortion is inadmissible even if pregnancy and parturition are dangerous for the life of the mother such as heart disease, kidneys disease or even if the pregnancy has come as result of the rape. In that case the arguments are simple: the child is not guilty neither in that nor in the other case, therefore he should not suffer. It is impossible to kill the harmless essence, which had not of conscious intention to bring harm to the mother and is not privy to circumstances of conceiving, and therefore does not bear for them of any responsibility as well as does not deserve such punishment as deprivation of life. 

For reinforcement of the basic argument the supporters of this position result a line of additional ones. Among them the indication that the mother biologically such as socially is responsible for the child, because he is helpless essence who is requiring for the mother and which is not able to survive by a different way. Before him the mother as well as father has special responsibility also, since he is not foreigner for them, but flesh from their flesh and blood from their blood. Therefore there exists not only biological, but the moral duty also- duty of strong to protect and to care for weak. 

As to the rights and interests of the mother, by comparison them with the rights and interests of the child there is a probability of preference of interests of the infant: nobody knows, that will become from that human essence: it may l be the greatest genius? - his right on life is equivalent and can be more valuable the rights of the mother on life anyway. More compromise position considers an abortion as inadmissible, but by way of exception in those cases when there were medical contra-indications, or when the rape was made recognized an opportunity of intervention. Thus the admissibility of exceptions is given reason by necessity to take into account interests and desires of the mother. In the first case - her right on life and health is restrained , and in a case of rape - there is no voluntary consent the woman, is the man also and has the right to life, health and freedom too. In spite of the fact that these positions strongly differ, they both state the constant main initial thesis: a germ is the human essence and he has right on life. 

The arguments in protection of abortions developed of two kinds of the proofs: critical and positive , which nevertheless are closely connected among themselves - the critical are directed on easing of the argument of the opposite party, but thus they indirectly prove own positions. At the same time positive reasons deprived of critical heat lose in the persuasive-ness and more difficultly for the proof. First of all, the criticism is concentrated on the basic argument of the opponents of abortions, that the germ is a human essence, or more exactly on identity of concepts of "germ" and "man: the matter is during pregnancy the germ passes certain changing each other stages of development: the cell - the embryo - the fetus - the infant and not each germ will be developed up to a level of the child. The similar distinctions are admitted even for plants: there is the distinction between seed, slip and the plant. 

Even opponents of abortions recognize, that the germ requires the mother because he can not develop outside of her body and should exist pre-natally within nine months. That means, before the birth he is not independent yet and the act of birth defines that moment when he becomes rather independent: for this reason in western tradition the birth is considered as the beginning of life of the man. Thus, the finding of the complete moral status of a fruit is not quality, initially of him, but result of gradual process, in which we can establish not exact date, and only stage on which that essence becomes the moral subject." ...

Use our writing service by filling this request form to order your sample term paper today.