MUET -- Abortion

The following article is taken from the blog owner's answer for one of his mid-year exam papers. Due to inadequate demand of the language and time constraint, the article should not be deemed the final stance of the author, but a sampling of the author's thoughts on this "issue". [Lines in square brackets are added after the test.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abortion is the artificial termination of a pregnancy through surgical removal of the foetus from a woman's body. [Note: the same woman has to be pregnant.]

The quiet whispers and a sudden cry of anger when the question paper was distributed explains how controversial the issue of abortion is. However controversial or even enraging it is, the arguments for abortion never seem to enter the mainstream discourse. This may be indicative that our society at large views abortion as a moral wrong.

The fact that our society does not approve of abortion does not render a serious discussion on the issue academic. The arguments for and against abortion need to be scrutinized, as abortion concerns the welfare of women and society.

The argument against abortion is usually based on the sanctity of life. The sanctity of life of the foetus that is. It is argued that if the murder of a 30-year-old man is a crime, then so should be the "murder" of a 3-months-old foetus. The proponents against abortion argue that to remove a foetus from the mother's body, thereby depriving it of life, is an act of brutal murder. [扣帽子] Strong as it sounds, this argument is not uncontended. [uncontended valid]

[Bomb:] Our current law permits abortion to be carried out by an O&G (obstetrics and gynaecology) specialist, provided that the health of the mother would be compromised if the term were continued. Therefore, it appears that abortion is acceptable if a woman's health is at risk due to her pregnancy. However, this acceptance contradicts the argument of [of based on the] sanctity of life. If it is unacceptable to kill a 30-year-old man for our own good health, then why is the alleged "murder" of a foetus be acceptable if his life is equal to that of a fully-grown adult? The apparent inconsistency shows that the society do not actually perceive lives to be equal.

[Bomb2:] An important legal concept in the English Common Law, upon which many judicial precedents in our country are based, is the 'duty of care'. This legal concept can be illustrated by the following example. An Olympic games swimmer walks to a pool side, and sees a toddler drowning. What does our law compel him to do? Nothing. Legally speaking, he is not obliged to rescue the victim, because he has no 'duty of care' for the victim. He may actually sit on the other end of the pool, and watch the toddler drown to death. Now, the important question to ask regarding abortion is - why does our law mandate a pregnant woman to continue carrying the foetus for 9 months [alright, some say it's 10, whatever, fail my biology lah.]? How is this 'duty of care' established in the 'woman-foetus' relationship?

I do not intend to imply that every mother wants their babies to die. In fact, mothers are generally kind and loving towards their "children", whether they have been born or are still in the wimb. [I wrote this line in because I realized that my English teacher is likely also a mother.] Nonetheless, in the case of rape which results in unwanted pregnancy, what could be the remedy to the sad situation? Abortion is currently not [an option] under our law. True, if the rape victim does not want the baby, she could give it for adoption, but what if she also does not want the pregnancy? It is the most unfortunate event that the state does not permit women to decide on what they want for their bodies. The use of state power to regulate a woman's [body] is arguable the most repugnant form of institutionalized oppression. In my opinion, no woman should be burdened for their entire lives because of a biological consequence, if they choose not to.

[Shit, no time already.] Our legal notion of a natural 'person' is one with body and mind. The foetus fails to satisfy both. [bomb] It's body is dependent upon the mother for every life processes, and the brain has not fully developed. If an ordinary person can decide whether they want to save a drowning baby, why can't a woman be given the right to decide on the fate of the foetus, which would probably affect her entire life?

However controversial abortion is, I believe it should be an option for women. This issue strongly affects women and our attitudes towards it reflect the society's view of women, whether they are humans of equal worth, or instruments whose body is subject to the interference of law and power. [interference of law and power.]

------------------------------------------------------------
1. Most arguments for abortion is derived from the content, as I can recall, of a book called "Feminism, issues and arguements" by Jennifer Saul.

2. A few days later, I came across a Buddhist pamphlet that persuades against abortion, and I was persuaded into thinking that abortion is "unethical" because of the cruelty. Currently, I maintain that abortion is some sort of moral dilemma, and that in principle the state should not decide on moral issues. Nonetheless I think it is "necessary" (as it appeals to me) that abortion of foetus older than a certain critical month should be banned. Like that la.

3. Would like to know how other people think.