Volume -
3 , - : 1-15 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
The Value of Fetal Life; a Critical Reflection on the Role of Personhood in Supporting Human Life. 3 https://doi.org/10.58209/jpt.4.1.1
URL: http://daneshafarand.org/article-1-71925-en.html
URL: http://daneshafarand.org/article-1-71925-en.html
| Abstract (HTML) (2813 Views)
Full-Text: (6 Views)
Introduction
Proponents of the personhood theory believe that, in order to protect human life, a human being can be considered a person [Boonin, 2002: 282]. There are questions: is being a person a basis for the right to life? Is the fetus a human being? [Singer: 1] When we say that the killing of innocent human life is seriously wrong, do we mean the importance of human as a concept [Gensler, 2011: 163]? Based on these questions, the theory of personhood can be criticized for its inherent value of the human being.
The relationship between life protection and personhood
About the concept of person, explained that the person is an actor [Hobbs, 2012: 183] or is an identity with rights and duties [Rasekh, 2003: 232] or someone who is an agent [Singer, 2011: 74] or abstract characteristics that are more than the human body [Al-Askari: 58]. The word (prosopon) is the role [Gadamer, 2021: 117] that an individual plays. About this issue, when personhood begins, some have based it on birth, and some have based it on the concept [formation] of the embryo becoming a group with a soul, sometimes the ability to continue life outside the mother's womb [Beker, 1996: 173-175], in some research awareness, rationality, self-motivational activity, the ability to transmit and recognize different messages, self-awareness and self-understanding [Warren, 1973: 5] is the basis for personhood. The maximum definition of personality considers moral agency, or at least its ability as its necessary condition [Warren, 1997: 90], and the minimum definition of it considers the ability to think and self-awareness as a necessary condition. The middle approach in the theory of personhood emphasizes the moral prohibition of late abortion [Robert, 2010: 39].
From another approach, it can be said that the theory of personhood is basically an argument against abortion [Greasley & Kaczor, 2018: 8]; This means that whenever the fetus becomes a person or is assumed to be a person, its abortion is immoral. The theory of personhood can provide a useful guide to assessing whether the fetus has a reasonable chance of becoming a person [Karnein, 2012: 18]. According to this theory, the fetus is only a potential human being and cannot and should not be supported like other humans, because the right to protect life belongs to a human being who possesses a series of realized characteristics. In addition to this, based on other theories, it should be said that even if the fetus is considered a person, abortion has been declared moral, where the fetus has been severely deformed physiologically [Li, 1997: 1] or in cases where the fetus is the result of rape.
The value of life and its effects on the prohibition of abortion
The fetus is something [Brazier, 2013: 118] that belongs to the human species that has a life, and we certainly know what a human being is [Kreeft, 2002: 17]. If we believe that the life of the fetus has no value, we must believe that the life of some (human beings) does not have value [York, 2010: 5]; a subject that can be morally criticized.
The basis of life protection and its effect on abortion freedom
The moral value of human beings is connected to human dignity, and human dignity is certainly inseparable from what a human being is [Malpas, 2007: 19]. Being a person is not a characteristic of being human, and being a person does not affect our human nature. According to the personhood dependent principle the fetus has value [Karnein, 2012: 30[; based on this argument the human physical organism takes the form of a concept when it has been fertilized [Lee, 2010: 71] and it is at the stage of fertilization that a different human entity begins [Potts & Mahoney, 1967: 211]. This does not mean people have less intrinsic value by virtue of having a lower quality of life [Regan, 2018:154]. Humans are alive because they are made up of organs, tissues, and individual cells, all of which are alive [Lodish in Thagard, 2017: 233]. The mere existence of man and his life has intrinsic value [Rittosa, 2008: 24]. Both embryos and adults are (by nature) similar in real existence [Rhonheimer, 2010: 202], and being a human being is a biological classification [Alghrani, 2013: 181]. The only thing that can be considered about the physiological state of the fetus is that the body of the fetus is one of the rare cases that is dependent on the mother's body [Sumner, 1981: 8], and it should be said that from the fact that the fetus is not a person, it cannot necessarily be concluded that killing the fetus is not morally wrong.
Fetus rights and their effect on protecting him/her
Most modern philosophers reject the idea that parents are the owners of their children, and therefore they do not accept the theories that give parents rights over their children [Austin, 2019: 7]. Man is the owner of rights [Garou, 1965: 467], and Rights are the building blocks of the legal system [Laughlin, 2009: 277], and the right to benefit from protection [Feridan, 2009: 81] is the basis of legal systems. Apart from the definition of a fetus as a human being, it must be said that causing pain and suffering in any sentient and feeling creature is considered morally objectionable. One of the reasons for criticizing immoral actions is that we do not have the right to cause pain and suffering to a creature that feels something, and there are many creatures that are not rational and do not have self-awareness and are not persons, but because they have an understanding of suffering and they have pain and happiness, we have no right to cause pain and suffering in them, and it is immoral to kill a creature that has the ability to experience pain and happiness. A fetus may not have all the rights of a born human being, but as a being with life, naturally, its life and its chance to survive should be protected as the basis of the value of rights. Besides this, in cases where a third party perpetrates an abortion, and the mother did not consent, it raises the issue of what is the basis of the mother's legal claims in this case [Kamm, 1992: 20].
The process of fetal life and its effects on her/his protection
For some, like Simon, the ability to grow and survive is a basis in the discussion of the permissibility or impermissibility of abortion. From his point of view, as a fetus, he himself lacks such ability; therefore, he will not be considered a perfect person. Simon's argument has a metaphysical basis [Beckwith, 2007: 47-48], and this basis can be criticized. According to the theory of fetal movement, the fetus begins to move on its own at a certain time, which occurs in the fifth and sixth weeks after fertilization. Some have expressed that we cannot kill a six-month-old premature baby, but you can abort a developed [six-month-old unborn] fetus [Jamshidi, 2015: 22]. In another approach to fetal movement, one can be convinced of its presence when the pregnant woman feels it, and this will occur from the sixteenth to the seventeenth week after conception. In criticism of this view expressed by the fertilization of egg and sperm, a new being is created that has its own genetic code, and until it dies, the title of having life will be applied to it, and all that it needs to survive is water, food, air, and environment. Therefore, only the conditions and place of life of the fetus differ, and in terms of the type of need for the facilities and conditions necessary for life, it is not fundamentally different from other humans.
Conclusion
According to the above reasons, it should be said that since the human fetus is a human being and has life, its life is valuable, and as soon as it is formed as a new being, it deserves to be protected. Being a person is not a feature of the definition of human nature, but a state that enables a person to enjoy a series of rights. What constitutes the basis of the right is the protection of human life.
Proponents of the personhood theory believe that, in order to protect human life, a human being can be considered a person [Boonin, 2002: 282]. There are questions: is being a person a basis for the right to life? Is the fetus a human being? [Singer: 1] When we say that the killing of innocent human life is seriously wrong, do we mean the importance of human as a concept [Gensler, 2011: 163]? Based on these questions, the theory of personhood can be criticized for its inherent value of the human being.
The relationship between life protection and personhood
About the concept of person, explained that the person is an actor [Hobbs, 2012: 183] or is an identity with rights and duties [Rasekh, 2003: 232] or someone who is an agent [Singer, 2011: 74] or abstract characteristics that are more than the human body [Al-Askari: 58]. The word (prosopon) is the role [Gadamer, 2021: 117] that an individual plays. About this issue, when personhood begins, some have based it on birth, and some have based it on the concept [formation] of the embryo becoming a group with a soul, sometimes the ability to continue life outside the mother's womb [Beker, 1996: 173-175], in some research awareness, rationality, self-motivational activity, the ability to transmit and recognize different messages, self-awareness and self-understanding [Warren, 1973: 5] is the basis for personhood. The maximum definition of personality considers moral agency, or at least its ability as its necessary condition [Warren, 1997: 90], and the minimum definition of it considers the ability to think and self-awareness as a necessary condition. The middle approach in the theory of personhood emphasizes the moral prohibition of late abortion [Robert, 2010: 39].
From another approach, it can be said that the theory of personhood is basically an argument against abortion [Greasley & Kaczor, 2018: 8]; This means that whenever the fetus becomes a person or is assumed to be a person, its abortion is immoral. The theory of personhood can provide a useful guide to assessing whether the fetus has a reasonable chance of becoming a person [Karnein, 2012: 18]. According to this theory, the fetus is only a potential human being and cannot and should not be supported like other humans, because the right to protect life belongs to a human being who possesses a series of realized characteristics. In addition to this, based on other theories, it should be said that even if the fetus is considered a person, abortion has been declared moral, where the fetus has been severely deformed physiologically [Li, 1997: 1] or in cases where the fetus is the result of rape.
The value of life and its effects on the prohibition of abortion
The fetus is something [Brazier, 2013: 118] that belongs to the human species that has a life, and we certainly know what a human being is [Kreeft, 2002: 17]. If we believe that the life of the fetus has no value, we must believe that the life of some (human beings) does not have value [York, 2010: 5]; a subject that can be morally criticized.
The basis of life protection and its effect on abortion freedom
The moral value of human beings is connected to human dignity, and human dignity is certainly inseparable from what a human being is [Malpas, 2007: 19]. Being a person is not a characteristic of being human, and being a person does not affect our human nature. According to the personhood dependent principle the fetus has value [Karnein, 2012: 30[; based on this argument the human physical organism takes the form of a concept when it has been fertilized [Lee, 2010: 71] and it is at the stage of fertilization that a different human entity begins [Potts & Mahoney, 1967: 211]. This does not mean people have less intrinsic value by virtue of having a lower quality of life [Regan, 2018:154]. Humans are alive because they are made up of organs, tissues, and individual cells, all of which are alive [Lodish in Thagard, 2017: 233]. The mere existence of man and his life has intrinsic value [Rittosa, 2008: 24]. Both embryos and adults are (by nature) similar in real existence [Rhonheimer, 2010: 202], and being a human being is a biological classification [Alghrani, 2013: 181]. The only thing that can be considered about the physiological state of the fetus is that the body of the fetus is one of the rare cases that is dependent on the mother's body [Sumner, 1981: 8], and it should be said that from the fact that the fetus is not a person, it cannot necessarily be concluded that killing the fetus is not morally wrong.
Fetus rights and their effect on protecting him/her
Most modern philosophers reject the idea that parents are the owners of their children, and therefore they do not accept the theories that give parents rights over their children [Austin, 2019: 7]. Man is the owner of rights [Garou, 1965: 467], and Rights are the building blocks of the legal system [Laughlin, 2009: 277], and the right to benefit from protection [Feridan, 2009: 81] is the basis of legal systems. Apart from the definition of a fetus as a human being, it must be said that causing pain and suffering in any sentient and feeling creature is considered morally objectionable. One of the reasons for criticizing immoral actions is that we do not have the right to cause pain and suffering to a creature that feels something, and there are many creatures that are not rational and do not have self-awareness and are not persons, but because they have an understanding of suffering and they have pain and happiness, we have no right to cause pain and suffering in them, and it is immoral to kill a creature that has the ability to experience pain and happiness. A fetus may not have all the rights of a born human being, but as a being with life, naturally, its life and its chance to survive should be protected as the basis of the value of rights. Besides this, in cases where a third party perpetrates an abortion, and the mother did not consent, it raises the issue of what is the basis of the mother's legal claims in this case [Kamm, 1992: 20].
The process of fetal life and its effects on her/his protection
For some, like Simon, the ability to grow and survive is a basis in the discussion of the permissibility or impermissibility of abortion. From his point of view, as a fetus, he himself lacks such ability; therefore, he will not be considered a perfect person. Simon's argument has a metaphysical basis [Beckwith, 2007: 47-48], and this basis can be criticized. According to the theory of fetal movement, the fetus begins to move on its own at a certain time, which occurs in the fifth and sixth weeks after fertilization. Some have expressed that we cannot kill a six-month-old premature baby, but you can abort a developed [six-month-old unborn] fetus [Jamshidi, 2015: 22]. In another approach to fetal movement, one can be convinced of its presence when the pregnant woman feels it, and this will occur from the sixteenth to the seventeenth week after conception. In criticism of this view expressed by the fertilization of egg and sperm, a new being is created that has its own genetic code, and until it dies, the title of having life will be applied to it, and all that it needs to survive is water, food, air, and environment. Therefore, only the conditions and place of life of the fetus differ, and in terms of the type of need for the facilities and conditions necessary for life, it is not fundamentally different from other humans.
Conclusion
According to the above reasons, it should be said that since the human fetus is a human being and has life, its life is valuable, and as soon as it is formed as a new being, it deserves to be protected. Being a person is not a feature of the definition of human nature, but a state that enables a person to enjoy a series of rights. What constitutes the basis of the right is the protection of human life.
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |