How do we prioritise what matters in life, and whose life matters most? These are questions that are routinely posed in the context of medical care. While the moral status of the embryo is debated, the moral status of a pregnant woman does not change when she becomes pregnant. As the public focus has shifted onto the fetus in the abortion debate, the situation of the pregnant woman seems to have become marginal. The right to the integrity of one’s body is essential to the widely held Kantian principle that people have intrinsic value and should not be used solely for the benefit of others. When considering the future of a pregnancy, somebody must decide and there is a compelling case for the decision being made by the person who lives with the consequences.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use onlyLearn about institutional subscriptions
Judith Jarvis Thomson (1971). A defense of abortion. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 1, republished in Louis Pojman and Francis J. Beckwith (1998). The Abortion Controversy: 25 Years After Roe v. Wade, A Reader, 2nd edn. Belmont: Wadsworth, pp. 117–132.
Stephen D. Schwarz (1990). The Moral Question of Abortion. Chicago: Loyola University Press.
John Harris (1975). The Survival Lottery. Philosophy, 50(191), 81–87.
See H. J. Paton (1958) Translation, Commentary and Analysis of Immanual Kant: The Moral Law—Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. London: Routledge.
David S. Oderberg (2000a). Applied Ethics: A Non-Consequentialist Approach. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 22–31.
Cited in Rosalind Pollack Petchesky (1986). Abortion and Women’s Choice: The State, Sexuality and Reproductive Freedom. London: Verso, p. 3.
Emily Jackson (2001). Regulating Reproduction: Law, Technology and Autonomy. Oxford: Hart.
Ellie Lee, Jennie Bristow, Charlotte Faircloth and Jan Macvarish (2014). Parenting Culture Studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lynn M. Paltrow and Jeanne Flavin (2013). The Policy and Politics of Reproductive Health Arrests of and Forced Interventions on Pregnant Women in the United States, 1973–2005: Implications for Women’s Legal Status and Public Health. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 38(2), 299–343.
WHO Alcohol, Drugs and Addictive Behaviours Unit (2021) Global Strategy to Reduce the Harmful Use of Alcohol. WHO: Geneva.
Paton v. Trustees of British Pregnancy Advisory Service  2 All 987 and Paton v. UK  ECHR 408 discussed in S. Sheldon (1997). Beyond Control: Medical Power and Abortion Law. London: Pluto Press, pp. 87–90.
Mark Wicclair (2011). Conscientious Objection in Health Care: An Ethical Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Christian Fiala and Joyce H. Arthur (2014). “Dishonourable disobedience”—Why Refusal to Treat in Reproductive Healthcare Is Not Conscientious Objection. Woman– Psychosomatic Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 1, 12–23.
For example the British Medical Association provides conscientious objection guidance for doctors and medical students and the General Medical Council has clear rules on how doctors must behave when they choose to object.
See Bernard M. Dickens (2014). The right to conscience. In Rebecca J. Cook, Joanna N. Erdman and Bernard M. Dickens (Eds.), Abortion Law in Transnational Perspective: Cases and Controversies. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Furedi, A. (2021). Because Women Are People. In: The Moral Case for Abortion. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90189-9_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-90188-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-90189-9