The Morality and Ethics of Unborn Individuals: A Critical Analysis

The debate around the rights and moral status of unborn individuals has been a contentious subject in legal, ethical, and medical circles. While discussions often surround the legality of abortion, one frequently overlooked aspect is the moral responsibility of parents for the unborn. This article explores the ethical implications of the “right to control one’s body” and whether it applies to the unborn.

Right to Control vs. Accountability

The phrase “right to control one’s body” is often invoked to justify actions that negatively impact the mother, such as abortion. However, this sentiment mistakenly shifts accountability away from the parents to the unborn individual. From a moral and ethical standpoint, the creation of a life problem lies with the mother and father, who must take responsibility for their decisions.

See common sense would suggest that if you create a problem for someone else, you are obligated to make it right. Who created this life problem for the fetus? It would be the mother and father, making them liable for the fetus. They are legally and morally responsible for its well-being.

No Awareness or Control

The notion that the unborn can control its body or make decisions is deeply flawed. Scientifically, the unborn lacks awareness and autonomy. It is a developing being who cannot make choices or decisions. Any claims of the unborn actively choosing to be in the mother's body or wanting to be killed are not grounded in reality.

The unborn has no ability to control its body. They have no awareness. They are mere embryos and fetuses under development. They are a product of their parents’ choices and actions.

Contacting Consciousness and Liability

Some argue that the unborn make decisions based on soul choices, which is a matter of faith. However, in the realm of ethics and law, the unborn are regarded as part of the mother until they are born. Parents, as legal guardians, are responsible for their unborn child's well-being, and any infringement on this responsibility can be seen as a violation of their rights.

When they say pro-choice, the choice they want is the choice to avoid liability and accountability for their own choices. There is a clear reliance on the unborn to bear the consequences of the mother and father's actions, which is ethically unjustifiable.

Comparative Ethical Considerations

The idea that the right to control one’s body should apply to the unborn raises ethical concerns when compared to other vulnerable populations, such as children. For instance, the concept of consent of the individual is paramount in modern medicine, but it is not always feasible to obtain from underdeveloped fetuses or newborns. However, parents cannot be absolved of their responsibility for the medical care of their child simply because the child cannot give consent.

If the right to control one’s body applies to the unborn, then it must also apply to children. In that case, practices like circumcision would be considered physical assault, and parents would be held legally liable for such actions. This demonstrates that the responsibility of parents extends beyond the moment of birth and should be ethically and legally recognized.

Conclusion

The debate over the rights and moral status of unborn individuals is complex and multifaceted. While the concept of the right to control one’s body is often used to argue for certain procedural rights, it is important to consider the broader ethical and legal implications. Parents must take responsibility for the unborn and recognize their legal and moral obligations. Ethical considerations demand that we prioritize the well-being and protection of the unborn, rather than shifting accountability to them.

No, the unborn do not have rights. Women do, and they are the ones who must bear the responsibility of their choices regarding their pregnancy. Accountability and respect for the mother's rights are paramount in this discussion.