Skip to main content

Because Women Are People

  • 510 Accesses


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.

Buying options

USD   14.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   19.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions


  1. 1.

    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.

  2. 2.

    Stephen D. Schwarz (1990). The Moral Question of Abortion. Chicago: Loyola University Press.

  3. 3.

    John Harris (1975). The Survival Lottery. Philosophy, 50(191), 81–87.

  4. 4.

    See H. J. Paton (1958) Translation, Commentary and Analysis of Immanual Kant: The Moral Law—Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. London: Routledge.

  5. 5.

    David S. Oderberg (2000a). Applied Ethics: A Non-Consequentialist Approach. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 22–31.

  6. 6.

    Cited in Rosalind Pollack Petchesky (1986). Abortion and Womens Choice: The State, Sexuality and Reproductive Freedom. London: Verso, p. 3.

  7. 7.

    Emily Jackson (2001). Regulating Reproduction: Law, Technology and Autonomy. Oxford: Hart.

  8. 8.

    Ellie Lee, Jennie Bristow, Charlotte Faircloth and Jan Macvarish (2014). Parenting Culture Studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

  9. 9.

    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.

  10. 10.

    WHO Alcohol, Drugs and Addictive Behaviours Unit (2021) Global Strategy to Reduce the Harmful Use of Alcohol. WHO: Geneva.

  11. 11.

    Paton v. Trustees of British Pregnancy Advisory Service [1978] 2 All 987 and Paton v. UK [1980] ECHR 408 discussed in S. Sheldon (1997). Beyond Control: Medical Power and Abortion Law. London: Pluto Press, pp. 87–90.

  12. 12.

    Mark Wicclair (2011). Conscientious Objection in Health Care: An Ethical Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  13. 13.

    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.

  14. 14.

    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.

  15. 15.

    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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Furedi, A. (2021). Because Women Are People. In: The Moral Case for Abortion. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Download citation

  • DOI:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-90188-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-90189-9

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)