By Ganishka Bijani, FLAME University, Ananya Dhutia, FLAME University and Melody Kshetrimayum, FLAME University
Abortion is one of the most complex ethical issues due to its association with religious and political values. Opinions on abortion are polarized and hence, the policies related to abortion are diverse. Abortion-rights movement and anti-abortion movements have advocated opposing policies. The rights movement also known as pro-choice supports advocates for women’s rights, autonomy and bodily integrity and legal access to abortion services while the anti-abortion movement advocates for protection of unborn children and argues for unborn child’s right to live. The abortion debate- pro- choice and pro-life which are also rooted in fundamental, moral and philosophical ideas, leads to conflict between women’s autonomy and foetuses’ rights.
Maternal deaths due to medical complications are high across countries. Inaccessibility to safe means of abortion instead of lowering cases, increases the number of women undergoing unsafe abortion. It is estimated that there are approximately 22 million unsafe abortions annually, resulting in 47,000 deaths and 5 million complications resulting in hospital admission. One of the factors driving unsafe abortion is the lack of safe abortion services, even where they are legal. Restriction in access to safe abortion services results in both unsafe abortions and unwanted births (World Health Organisation). Further, it also leaves no other option but for women to resort to unsafe and non-medically supervised procedures to get an abortion under adverse conditions which can pose a threat to their life and chances of maternity in the future. In contrast, supportive and accessible resources would create the preconditions for safely administered abortions and terminate the risks associated with unsafe procedures, allowing women to make a rational decision to abort a foetus under unfavourable circumstances. Despite evidence from all over the world showing that the legal proscription of abortion has little effect on the number of abortions but has adverse impact on the health of mothers, roughly one-third of the world’s women live in countries with strict abortion legislation, where women are not allowed to opt for abortion under any circumstances or only in extreme and/or emergent cases of rape, incest, or where the woman’s life or health is in serious danger (Mishra 2001). Denying abortion can also have critical economic implications which can result in an increase in household poverty relative to those who received an abortion. It can also perpetuate a state of financial crisis in which families cannot support the child adequately or provide access to quality life and resources.
Putting restrictions on a woman’s right to abortion is a rejection of their bodily autonomy and a violation of their personal rights and freedom. Firstly, there are several circumstances like threat to life, rape, foetal impairment and finances which induce a woman to seek an abortion. Secondly, the right to terminate a pregnancy falls within many human rights; for example, depending on the circumstances, restrictions on abortion maybe viewed as violating the: right to life; right to health; right to privacy/autonomy; right to equality/freedom from discrimination; and right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment (Sifris et al. 2017). Restrictive abortion access and its criminalisation at several stages, points at the unequal status of women in society, undermining their integrity and lawful rights as citizens of a country. It also undercuts their ability to take rational and crucial decisions with regards to their body. The practice of treating abortion differently to other forms of healthcare is discriminatory and derogatory in nature.
The moral acceptance of abortion varies significantly depending on cultural, religious, and philosophical perspectives. It revolves around questions of personhood, individual rights, the value of human life, and the balance between moral duties. Several anti-abortion groups have called themselves “pro-life, ” asserting that the destruction of a foetus is an act of murder. They propose a debate over the precise moment when life begins, and a person exists. The anti-abortion people say it is at the moment of conception, and thus by a simple, logical extension any form of birth control becomes the prevention of the creation of life, an arbitrary and deliberate interruption of the life process. Women often feel morally guilty of undergoing abortion and for violating societal moral standards. The magnitude of impact of abortion on women’s life depends on many other social categories such as caste, class, ethnicity and religion. They end up giving in to the societal expectations while affecting their own health and mental health.
In India, abortion is legally governed by the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act 1971. This act has evolved to expand women’s autonomy and reproductive rights, allowing abortion for up to 24 weeks. Unlike the restrictive nature of laws worldwide, India recognises a woman’s right to decide to abort under various circumstances such as contraceptive failure, foetal abnormalities, pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. It can be noted that this policy is sometimes misused to determine sex of unborn babies. If a gender determining test shows a baby girl, women undergo coerced abortion to end the pregnancy. Though India’s abortion law is liberal relative to that of many nations, actual access, societal attitude, and administrative delays remain issues undermining women’s reproductive rights.
Establishing a balance between the moral status of the foetus and women’s autonomy is one of the most complex ethical challenges in the abortion debate. Abortion relates to two important aspects of women’s life, healthcare and autonomy. From human rights approach lens, women have reproductive rights to have access to safe abortions or to continue with the pregnancy. Imposing unwanted or forced pregnancies and denying abortion is abuse of reproductive right. Pro-choice does not necessarily mean promoting abortion but advocate women’s autonomy to decide on her own body to continue pregnancy or terminate it. Establishment of safe and accessible abortion resources will value human rights, personal choice and economic consideration.
References
Sifris, Ronli, and Suzanne Belton. “Australia: Abortion and Human Rights”. Health and Human Rights, vol. 19, no. 1, June. 2017, pp. 209–20. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/90007927.
Mishra, Yamini. “Unsafe Abortions and Women’s Health.” Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 36, no. 40, Oct. 2001, pp. 3814–17. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4411195.
