monday night

A debate was organised the other night by edmedethics – ‘Abortion in the 21st century – the medicine, the ethics and the law.’ Mrs Ann Furedi (Chief Executive of BPAS, the British Pregnancy Advisory Service) presented the case that abortion provision is not only pragmatically defensible but ethically justifiable; Prof John Wyatt (professor of neonatal pediatrics at UCL) argued that there was ‘nearly always’ a better alternative to abortion.

The points of agreement between the two speakers were remarkable. Furedi pointed out that women who come to abortion clinics are “never” there to exercise “their political right to choose” – they would often have done anything to avoid being there, and it’s never an easy decision. As she also said, “we all want to work really hard to avoid abortions” – the rising rate of abortions is undoubtedly a concern, she said, as undergoing the procedure is “unpleasant, stressful, and usually distressing.”

The main disagreement therefore focused on what, in practical terms, should be the options available to a woman who did not feel she could continue with a pregnancy. Furedi argued that women should not be compelled to continue with a pregnancy against their will – the option to end it should always be available. Wyatt argued that there is always a better alternative. It might not be an easy alternative, he said, but there was nearly always a better alternative. He focused on the situtations and pressures that give rise to women’s feeling that there is no alternative but to end the pregnancy. In contrast to Furedi’s emphasis on the value of individual autonomy, he said that many women have an abortion not so much as a triumph of personal autonomy but precisely because they don’t see an alternative – under what influences, he asked, are women making these choices? – especially when their apparently autonomous decisions so often seem to serve other people’s interests.

Wyatt also mentioned the concept of the image of God. Furedi had argued for a distinction between ‘biological’ life and life that somehow “matters” – life that is conscious, self-aware, self-valuing, for example. But rather than making a division between those who have self-awareness and those who don’t, Wyatt pointed to the Judaeo-Christian principle that all human life is special – humans have intrinsic value whether they are self-aware and self-valuing or not. In considering ‘abortion in the 21st century,’ therefore, his question was how as a society we can best support each other to value and preserve all human life.

Questions from the floor were generally thoughtful, but I was particularly struck by one brave soul who suggested that the problem lies somewhat prior to the pregnancy itself – surely society should recognise, she offered, that sex is not an end in itself but does have consequences. This was shot down by Furedi, who pointed out that that’s simply not how society sees things today. But Wyatt did concur that there is a “murky, seedy side to our permissive society” – unwanted pregnancy is not the only consequence of risk-free casual promiscuity – there are questions about relationships, and people’s (especially women’s) self-worth and self-esteem, as significant social pressures which make up the context in which unwanted pregnancies occur.

What came across clearly was the concern of both speakers to deal compassionately with women in difficult circumstances and a recognition (on both sides, I felt) that abortion is not something to reach for as an easy way of solving people’s problems. The discussion was characterised by great courtesy and mutual respect, without the speakers compromising on the plain presentation and robust defence of controversial principles. And, somewhat similar to the (albeit rather less valuable) discussion on “assisted dying” last week, what distinguishes the practical response of both sides is in the perceived need they target – the unwanted pregnancy, or the circumstances which make it unwanted. Providing women (and couples) with the support they need in order not to go through with unpleasant procedures to terminate pregnancies would, surely, be a mark of a healthier and more caring society.


7 thoughts on “monday night

  1. Why does Wyatt believe that women’s self-worth and self-esteem in particular comes into question with promiscuity? Surely, it should have the same implications and impact for both men and women?


  2. Hmm, not sure now that what i’ve said there most accurately represents what he said. Looking back at my notes, verbatim they say “Risk-free casual promiscuity not a healthy sitn – pregnancy not the only conseq. So it’s about relnsps, self-worth, self-esteem – a woman doesn’t have to give sex to be valued.” (Can’t guarantee it was verbatim what Wyatt said obv.) Which suggests, i hope not too pedantically, that the punctuation in the post gives a slightly more ambiguous reading than is perhaps warranted. Ie a situation where people’s self-esteem etc is undermined is one where arguably they are more susceptible to behave ‘promiscuously’. Whether this is equally true for men and women … we do seem to belong to a society where the impact is arguably disproportionately worse for women – a highly sexualised culture which objectifies women not for their own benefit or empowerment. Not but that is also ultimately demeaning for men too. And unstigmatised promiscuity allows this undermining of personal dignity/respect to flourish. But it’s also women who have to deal immediately with unwanted pregnancies – whether ending up with a child in an unstable relationship or on their own, or ending the pregnancy with all the physical and emotional fallout that that often entails. Dunno.


  3. That’s really interesting, thanks for taking the time to write about it.

    “he said that many women have an abortion not so much as a triumph of personal autonomy but precisely because they don’t see an alternative”

    That statement sums up my experience when pregnant with our first child in Edinburgh. I was offered screening for downs syndrome and presented with a leaflet to take home.

    Well, I declined the test and took the leaflet to read. Boy was it depressing! If I had taken the test and had a positive for Downs syndrome it offered little useful information, instead referring me to an association for help. It stated in no uncertain terms that there is no medical cure for downs and that most people choose to end the pregnancy, it was so fatalistic in the way it was written, as if downs were a terminal disease.


  4. That’s pretty depressing. It sends out all the wrong signals about our response to disability too. Ie that there’s no place in our society for people with disabilities – the assumption is that individuals or couples will automatically not want their child if it’s somehow not quite up to standard, which must be a v difficult pressure to resist.


  5. I was struck while reading of the similarities with your euthanasia-discussions, but I see you’ve got there first with that too: And, somewhat similar to the (albeit rather less valuable) discussion on “assisted dying”…

    On the topic of women’s self-esteem in particular: I would suggest both men and women are affected by the negative aspects of sinful actions, but our intrinsic differences mean that we are affected through different means, and it appears to me that women’s self-esteem is more linked to these issues than men’s.

    Why that is, or if it’s a legitimate aspect of our makeup, I’m not quite sure… I do think it is these intrinsic differences that feminism/equal-opportunites arguments have sought to minimise and obscure.

    I think we need a more Christian understanding of how women’s phychological makeup is different from men’s and allow that to play a part in what is really a so-called “equal” society.

    I wouldn’t accept that we respond equally to situations in respect of e.g. our self-esteem – there is far too much evidence to the contrary, even in the workplace. There are different triggers to what is hurtful / upsetting or conversely what gives us satisfaction and makes us feel valued.

    Sorry, maybe I’m diverting too much from your original topic now… it is a subject that has intrigued me a bit lately, but I think I have generated more questions than answers for myself! (Maybe it’s about time I blogged… :-P )

    Thankyou for listening!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s