HLTH 380 Week 9: Abortion and Maternal-Fetal Conflicts PDF

Guest lecture ​ Grandriver hospital: procedural abortion ​ OHIP COVERS procedure ○​ If you dont have ohip, alot of money Pro-life and Pro-choice rhetoric ​ Evokes strong emotions ​ Dicotomous view ​ Portrayed as a polar opinion ​ Rhetoric of abortion ​ Fetus vs baby...

Guest lecture ​ Grandriver hospital: procedural abortion ​ OHIP COVERS procedure ○​ If you dont have ohip, alot of money Pro-life and Pro-choice rhetoric ​ Evokes strong emotions ​ Dicotomous view ​ Portrayed as a polar opinion ​ Rhetoric of abortion ​ Fetus vs baby ○​ Language used ​ Pro life and pro choice ○​ Important words used ○​ Autonomy: ○​ Using against eachother ​ Killing vs removing ○​ Removal is more detached. One has the connotation of murder ​ Human life vs body part ○​ What is it? ​ Deonileen loseke - claims making activity ○​ Both sides of the debate you have passionate claim makers ​ Villains, victims, framing claims ○​ Pro life: ​ Victims are the babies ​ Victims are the babies ​ Solution: not letting this happen ○​ 2 campaigns arfe creating 2 different perspectives ○​ Our understanding: understand moral and legal implications of actions ○​ When dicotomus, the answers are usually somewghere in between Religious and historical views ​ There is no notion of fetal rights in the bible ​ Formally formed / unformed fetus (without a soul) ○​ Often time women would deduce pregnancy on own bodily changes ○​ Women relied on the help of others (herbals) ○​ Notion of how to terminate pregnancy that predetermines what abortion is ○​ Not like there was not ways to terminate pregnancy in history ○​ Notion of termination became associated with a soul that enters the baby  ​ Associated the formed or unformed baby ​ Usually when baby is felt ​ Artistotle / aquinas (40 days male, 90 days- female) ○​ That time is different for both male and female fetus ○​ Male - formation of soul is 40 days ○​ Women - formation of soul is 90 ○​ Have seen no issue with termination before reaching this time ​ 19th century - biological knowledge established prohibition or abortion (catholic church) ○​ Introducing men in medicine ​ Abortion discussion came in ○​ More knowledge in biology ○​ Embryology as science started to develop ○​ Discoveries were made of the development of the fetus ○​ Whatever religion: we will not see religion that is FOR abortion. However, it was never spoken of in religion until recently ○​ The criminilation of abortion in many countries as a result ​ Doctrine of double effect ○​ Abortion is prohibited in cases where you need to save the mothers life ○​ Wouldnt be prohibited if the abortion comes indirectly: tumor on uterus, as a consequence abortion occurs ○​ One life does not equate to the other: basic assumption made ​ Protestants ​ Judaism ​ ○​ Priority will always be given to women ○​ Breathe in nostrils - baby willbe alive ○​ Never abort for financial reasons - never legal grounds ○​ If mother is suck, or mentall illness, or cannot be a caregiver because she will impact her wellbing, there would be permission for abortion ​ Islam ○​ Priority is given to women ○​ ​ Other religions or cultures? ○​ Catholic ○​ Priority is given to mothers ​ We often think its religion on abortion, Artistotle : life, soul and the body ​ basic , vegetative soul ○​ Plants, animals, and humans  ​ In many other religions, souls are in all living things ○​ Nourishment and reproduction ​ Animal, sensitive sould ○​ animals and humans ○​ Sense of perception and movement ○​ Only possessed by those because the implication of movement, pain, perception ​ Rational soul ○​ Humans only Legal perspectives illegalization of abortion Two transitions that contributed to illiteralization ○​ Medicalization of pregnancy ​ Contributed to the criminalization ○​ Womens status and feminist movement ​ Conflict between women being more politically active and when they were becoming criminalized Legalization of abortion ○​ Underground abortions ○​ Womens movement Moral questions and arguments ​ Does fetus have rights? ​ Is a fetus a person ​ Should a woman be forced to carry unwanted fetus to term?’ ​ does a woamn lose her autonomy because she is pregant ​ Does father have say on an abortion The moral status of the fetus ​ Conservative abortionalists ​ Middle ground ​ Liberals libertarians ​ What is a person? Gestation as a developmental process ​ Defining personhood ​ Moral status of the fetus ○​ When should their rights be considered to the womans rights?  ​ Attempt to draw a line ○​ Complicated because fetal medicine is improving ​ Trimesters of pregnancy ○​ When is it permissible, when is it no longer? ​ David Boonin: RE: Slippery Slope Argument ​ Daniel Callahan: Partial moral status ○​ Distribution of resources ○​ Assign to the imperial part of moral status ○​ Maybe person or maybe not—in between ​ Naomi Wolf: Abortion is undesirable and criticisable but not a murder ○​ Abortion should be undesirable and not taken lightly ○​ Adiment that abortion as murder is also wrong because the fetus body is not apart from the woman and cant live without it ○​ As long as it needs to live in the womans body its not its own and cant be murder Autonomy and the rights of women ​ Principle of autonomy – people have the right to make their own decisions about treatment ​ If the fetus is a person, what about the woman? ○​ ​ Sidney Callahan: Our right to control our bodies does not extend to controlling the bodies of others ​ When the fetus has a status of the autonomous body? ○​ Do we have dates you can make decisons for it untill this time Ethical Theory and abortions Utilitarian perspective ​ No morality in it Kantian perspective ​ Fetus doesnt have rationality; I wouldnt see it as violating human rights ​ May have issue with regarding abortion as a harm to yourself, like undergoing the procedure Virtue ethics ​ Rel.ating to the whole life Rosalind Hurthouse ​ Making the decision she wants to make ith the morla obligation it ahs on her and others Feminist perspectives ​ Strong support for women access to abortion  ​ Difference vs status or legalization vs looking at the 1 on 1 decisoon maternal -fetal conflict ​ Sexual violence against women ​ Maternal behaviour ​ Ms. G, Winnipeg 1997 ○​ Pregant woman was sniffing glue while pregnant ​ Live birth rule ○​ Law recognizes only the rights of the born person ○​ The life of the woman and the fetus are connected and should be treated as one ○​ Dichotomizing between the fetus and the mother would deprive mothers of the autonomy over their bodies ​ Fetal Therapies Conclusions Abortion is a unique discussion because it is not a new topic in biomedicine What you need to know for the exam History of abortion in Canada Religious and historical perspectives Roe vs. Wade and Dr. Morgentaler Social and political perspectives on abortions The moral status of the fetus Maternal fetal conflict Ethical theory and abortion Engagement activity – check other groups’ work B) Adolescents aged 13 and under must obtain permission from their parents or legal guardian to get an abortion. The parents must take into account the adolescent’s option and the decision must be made in the adolescent’s interest. c) barriers: Geographical location and provider availability:​ Doctors who are wsilling to perform abortions, and clinics in an area Along with access to thsoe clinics d) PEI was the last province to offer abortion services within the province; residents previously had to travel to other provinces for care  Textbook: chapter 7: abortion and maternal-fetal conflicts: ​ Ensolement = 40 days for a male fetus and 90 days for a female fetus ​ Death of fetus (in church eyes) is only premitted when nneded to save the life of a mother (AND death of a fetus as a secondary effect) ​ In jewish faith, human life begins with birth ​ Islan (and christianity) life is sacred because it comes form god Legal perspectives ​ The current legal situation in both Canada and the U.S. is the result of a decision of each country’s Supreme Court. In the U.S., the definitive deci- sion was Roe v. Wade in 1973; in Canada, it was the R. v. Morgentaler decision of 1988, referred to above. While these decisions made access to abortion easier in each country, the actual decisions and the reason- ing behind them are quite different. Rove v wade - U.S Summary of Roe v. Wade ​ Supreme Court Ruling: ○​ First Trimester: States cannot restrict abortion, based on the constitutional right to privacy, which includes a woman’s decision to terminate a pregnancy in its early stages. ○​ Second Trimester: States can regulate abortion procedures but only to protect maternal health. ○​ Third Trimester: States may restrict abortion after fetal viability, except when necessary to protect the life or health of the woman. ​ Key Principles: ○​ Right to Privacy: The decision centered on the constitutional guarantee of privacy, particularly in the early stages of pregnancy. ○​ Viability: States have a justified interest in protecting potential life once the fetus can survive outside the womb. ​ Subsequent Legal Challenges: ○​ Restrictions Attempted: Cases sought to limit abortion to hospitals, require spousal consent, or mandate counseling, but these were rejected by the Court. ○​ Funding for Abortions: The Court upheld laws that do not obligate states to fund abortions for the poor or allow Medicaid funds to cover abortions. ​ Ongoing Debate:  ○​ Late-Term Abortions: Controversy persists over banning late-term procedures, with continued opposition and advocacy on both sides. ○​ Impact of Roe: The decision intensified organized opposition to abortion (pro-life) and strengthened pro-choice defense of free choice. ​ Critiques of Roe: ○​ Pro-Life Criticism: The "life or health of the mother" exception in the third trimester is criticized as overly broad and vague. ○​ Pro-Choice Criticism: The reliance on fetal viability is problematic due to shifting definitions influenced by advancing neonatal technology. ​ Shifting Viability and Legal Issues: ○​ At the time of Roe, viability was approximately 28 weeks; now, it ranges from 22 to 24 weeks, creating ethical and legal complications. ○​ Justice Sandra Day O’Connor noted that Roe v. Wade's reliance on viability creates contradictions, as neonatal advancements blur distinctions between viable and non-viable fetuses. ​ Technological and Moral Dilemmas: ○​ The juxtaposition of efforts to save premature infants alongside abortions of fetuses at similar gestational ages highlights the ethical and legal complexities of the viability standard. Morgentaler - Canada ​ Here the Court decided that the existing law, requiring approval by a hospi- tal committee, went against the Charter of Rights because it did not allow equal access to abortion for all women in the country. Summary of R. v. Morgentaler (1988) ​ Court's Decision: ○​ The Supreme Court of Canada struck down the law requiring hospital committee approval for abortions, citing a violation of the Charter of Rights. ○​ The law was found to interfere with a woman’s physical and bodily integrity, violating her security of the person. ​ Chief Justice's Opinion: ○​ Forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term through criminal sanctions is a profound violation of her body and aspirations. ○​ Such restrictions could only be justified if consistent with the principles of fundamental justice, which the existing law failed to meet. ​ Issues with the Existing Law:  ○​ Abortion access was limited due to uneven availability of therapeutic abortion committees, with almost 25% of hospitals in Canada not offering abortion services. ○​ Lack of clarity in defining "health" of the pregnant woman led to differing interpretations (psychological vs. physical harm). ○​ Delays in obtaining abortion certificates negatively impacted access for many women. ​ Outcome: ○​ The law was deemed inconsistent with the principles of fundamental justice and struck down. ○​ Parliament was instructed to create a new law that respected equality rights under the Charter. ​ Post-Ruling Developments: ○​ A proposed bill in 1990 sought to allow abortion if a doctor determined a pregnancy threatened a woman’s physical, mental, or psychological health. ○​ The bill passed the House of Commons but was defeated by the Senate in 1991. ○​ No federal abortion law has been enacted since, leaving Canada without abortion restrictions in the Criminal Code—a unique situation globally. In 2016, before medical abortion was even available in Canada, the rate of medical abor- tions as a percentage of all abortions was 64 percent in France, 83 percent in Scotland, and 92 percent in Sweden Moral questions and arguments ​ The extreme positions that have been discussed above as pro-life and pro-choice can be more accurately labelled conservative or abolitionist on the one hand and liberal or libertarian on the other. For the aboli- tionists, abortion is never morally acceptable except (for some) to save the life of the pregnant woman. For the libertarians, abortion is morally acceptable at any time during the pregnancy and for any reason, and the decision to abort belongs ultimately to the woman (and her doctor). This is often referred to as abortion on demand. Summary: Slippery Slope Argument and the Acorn Objection ​ Slippery Slope Argument: ○​ Claims there is continuity from zygote to adult; if adults have a right to life, so must zygotes. ○​ Denying a zygote's right to life could lead to denying an adult's right to life, which is unacceptable. ​ Acorn and Oak Tree Analogy: ○​ Just as acorns are not oak trees despite continuity, zygotes may not have the same moral status as adults. ○​ The analogy highlights that continuity alone doesn't confer moral status or rights. ​ Defense of Slippery Slope Argument: ○​ Defenders argue that people are morally significant in ways oak trees are not. ○​ If oak trees were valued like people, continuity might justify moral status for acorns. ​ Counterargument to the Defense: ○​ The moral status of acorns depends on why oak trees are valued (e.g., "life force" or species membership). ○​ If acorns are granted rights, it’s because they already possess the relevant property (e.g., species membership), not because of continuity. ​ Flaw in the Slippery Slope Argument: ○​ Continuity doesn’t inherently justify a moral right to life. ○​ The argument assumes, rather than proves, the zygote's moral status, making it question-begging. Summary: Continuity, Slippery Slope Argument, and the Acorn Objection ​ Relation of Continuity: ○​ Fetal development is continuous, with incremental changes leading to an adult individual. ○​ This continuity is used in a slippery slope argument to assert that if adults have a right to life, so must zygotes. ​ Slippery Slope Argument: ○​ Denying the zygote’s right to life leads to the untenable conclusion that adults lack a right to life. ○​ The argument is popular but faces significant objections. ​ Acorn and Oak Tree Analogy: ○​ Continuity exists between acorns and oak trees, but this doesn’t imply acorns are oak trees. ○​ Critics use this analogy to challenge the slippery slope argument. ​ Defense of the Slippery Slope Argument: ○​ Defenders claim the analogy is flawed because people, unlike oak trees, hold special moral significance. ○​ They argue that if oak trees were valued like humans, acorns might also gain moral status due to continuity. ​ Counterargument to the Defense: ○​ The moral status of acorns depends on why oak trees are valued (e.g., for life force or species membership). ○​ If acorns share these properties, their moral status is independent of continuity and doesn’t rescue the slippery slope argument.  ​ Core Flaw in the Argument: ○​ The slippery slope assumes that continuity between zygote and adult is sufficient to grant a right to life. ○​ This assumption begs the question by presupposing, rather than proving, the zygote’s moral status. ​ Conclusion: ○​ Continuity alone doesn’t justify moral equivalence between early and later developmental stages. ○​ The acorn objection remains a strong rebuttal to the slippery slope argument. Summary: What Is a Person? ​ Complexity of Personhood: ○​ Determining whether a fetus is a person is a central philosophical question in abortion debates. ○​ Personhood often defines the moral community and determines moral status and rights. ​ Criteria for Personhood (Warren's Perspective): ○​ Characteristics proposed for personhood include: ​ Consciousness and the ability to feel pain. ​ Reasoning, or the ability to solve complex problems. ​ Self-motivated activity (not reflexive). ​ Communication capacity. ​ Self-awareness. ○​ A being that satisfies none of these criteria cannot be considered a person. ​ Application to Fetuses: ○​ Later fetuses (7–8 months) may have rudimentary consciousness, making them more person-like than early fetuses. ○​ However, Warren argues they are still less person-like than most mammals or even average fish. ​ Criticisms of Warren's View: ○​ Ambiguity: Terms like "consciousness" lack clear definitions. ○​ Inconsistencies: Excludes fetuses capable of feeling pain from the moral community, despite using pain capacity as a criterion for personhood. ○​ Moral Implications: Criteria do not clearly distinguish between late fetuses and newborns, potentially justifying infanticide. ​ Alternative View: ○​ Some argue that birth itself marks the transition into the moral community, as per certain cultural or religious perspectives (e.g., the Jewish stance). Summary: "Why Abortion Is Immoral" ​ Theoretical Basis for Killing’s Wrongness:  ○​ Killing is wrong because it deprives the victim of their future, including experiences, activities, and joys they would have otherwise enjoyed. ○​ This loss encompasses both what the victim values currently and what they would come to value in the future. ​ Implications of the "Future-Like-Ours" Argument: ○​ Not Limited to Humans: ​ Killing is wrong for any being with a future similar in value to ours, whether human or nonhuman (e.g., extraterrestrial species or some nonhuman mammals). ○​ Compatible with Euthanasia: ​ Killing is not necessarily wrong for individuals without valuable futures (e.g., terminally ill patients). ○​ Applies to Children and Infants: ​ Infants and children have valuable futures, making killing them prima facie wrong. ​ This resolves a weakness in personhood theories, which struggle to explain the wrongness of killing infants. ○​ Supports Both Sanctity-of-Life and Personhood Theories: ​ Combines strengths of both views while avoiding their weaknesses. ​ Consequences for Abortion: ○​ A standard fetus has a future comparable to that of children and adults, making abortion prima facie wrong in most cases. ○​ The argument does not rely on concepts like "personhood" or "potential persons"; it centers on the value of the future lost. ○​ Abortion could only be justified by compelling reasons, similar to the justification required for killing an adult. ○​ Early abortions (before the fetus is definitively an individual) may be exceptions but would still require moral justification. ​ Key Conclusion: ○​ Abortion is prima facie immoral due to the loss of a valuable future, but this does not mean it is always wrong; rare cases may justify it Summary: Gestation as a Developmental Process ​ Fetal Development as a Process: ○​ Growth from zygote to baby is continuous and developmental. ○​ Early stages: ​ Pre-embryonic stage (up to 2 weeks): Blastocyst, capable of splitting into twins. ​ Embryo stage (up to 8 weeks): Size comparable to a pinhead. ​ Fetal stage (22–24 weeks): Viable outside the womb. ​ Impact on Moral Status: ○​ The developmental stage of the fetus influences its moral status and the justification for abortion.  ○​ Moderate views often consider early abortion more acceptable than late-term abortion, which is seen as morally problematic unless in serious cases (e.g., risk to the mother’s life or severe fetal deformity). ​ Drawing the Moral Line: ○​ Ethical challenges arise in identifying a non-arbitrary line for moral consideration: ​ Possible lines include implantation (2 weeks), sentience (13 weeks), or viability (23–24 weeks). ​ The "slippery slope" argument claims fetal development is continuous, making it difficult to draw distinctions. ​ Rebuttal: Continuity alone (e.g., between acorn and oak tree) does not grant equal moral status to zygotes and adults. ​ Weighing Woman’s Rights: ○​ As fetal rights increase with development, a pregnant woman’s rights might decrease. ○​ Late-term abortions are heavily restricted in many countries and often align with public opinion favoring early-term abortion rights. ​ Partial Moral Status: ○​ Daniel Callahan: ​ Fetus is a valuable form of life, deserving consideration but not equivalent to a person. ​ Abortion can still be a responsible and moral decision. ​ Another way of moderating the extreme views regarding the moral status of the fetus is to assign some kind of partial moral status to the fetus. Such a position, while circumventing the issue of person- hood, raises other questions because of the vague- ness of what is meant by partial. However, this is the position taken by the ethicist Daniel Callahan, who does not grant the fetus the moral status of a person, but still believes that it is a valuable form of life that should not be destroyed lightly. Abortion is the destruction of a potential human life and this fact should be admitted: “It is not the destruction of a human person... but it is the destruction of an important and valuable form of human life.”37 ○​ Naomi Wolf: ​ Denying the fetus any moral status is dehumanizing. ​ Abortion is a serious moral act, often a "necessary evil" rather than murder. ○​ Grobstein suggests subcategories (e.g., prepersons, protoper-sons) to recognize prenatal development stages. ​ Balanced Perspectives: ○​ Partial moral status bridges extreme views: ​ Opposes the notion of complete moral status from conception. ​ Rejects the denial of moral status until birth. ○​ Emphasizes brain maturation as critical to defining personhood and moral status. ​ ​ ​ Summary: Autonomy and the Rights of Women ​ Autonomy as a Core Principle: ○​ Treating the fetus as a person with full moral status can undermine a pregnant woman's autonomy, effectively treating her as a means rather than an end. ○​ Autonomy in bioethics emphasizes the right to control one's body, and denying this to pregnant women contradicts this principle. ​ Conflicting Perspectives: ○​ Pro-life feminist argument (e.g., Sidney Callahan): ​ A woman’s right to autonomy does not extend to harming another body, including the fetus. ​ The fetus deserves protection like handicapped individuals, newborns, and others in the moral community. ○​ Pro-choice feminist argument: ​ The fetus, especially at early stages, is not in the same moral category as living persons. ​ Until viability, the fetus is dependent on the woman’s body and cannot be considered entirely separate. ​ Restricting abortion undermines women’s autonomy and societal equality. ​ Societal Implications: ○​ Enforced pregnancy can prevent women from achieving economic and social equality, especially in cases of failed contraception or coercion. ○​ Callahan’s counterpoint: ​ Equality should come from societal and paternal support for childbearing and rearing, not permissive abortion laws. ​ Fears arise that permissive abortion laws relieve men of responsibility for children. Ethical theory and abortion Ethical Theory and Abortion ​ Complex Moral Issue: ○​ Abortion is morally complex and cannot be easily resolved by ethical theories, as they often assume a moral community, which the fetus's inclusion in is debated. ​ Kantian Ethics: ○​ Kantian ethics struggles to apply to abortion due to the fetus not being a rational, self-legislating agent, unlike a pregnant woman. ○​ The woman's autonomy allows her to decide whether to continue an unwanted pregnancy, and forcing her to carry it infringes on her autonomy. ○​ Kant’s view on duties to oneself raises moral concerns about intentionally harming one’s body. ​ Utilitarianism:  ○​ Abortion can be justified if it leads to more happiness than unhappiness, considering not only the woman's interests but also the father, other children, and the community. ○​ Rule utilitarianism could support abortion restrictions if a permissive abortion policy leads to negative societal consequences. ​ Virtue Ethics: ○​ Virtue ethics focuses on the character of the person making the decision rather than the fetus's moral status. ○​ A virtuous woman would make an informed decision, considering her life circumstances, and may decide that abortion is the responsible choice. ○​ Even if abortion is the right decision, it can still reflect a moral failing or involve harm, reflecting on the complexity of the decision. ​ Feminist Bioethics: ○​ Feminist bioethicists argue that standard ethical theories overlook the fact that fetuses grow inside women, making the woman’s experience central to the ethical analysis. ○​ Feminists emphasize that abortion decisions should recognize the gender and power dynamics, as childbearing and child-rearing disproportionately burden women. ○​ Feminists advocate for legal, safe, and accessible abortion services, as the decision is intimately tied to the woman’s body and life. Maternal-Fetal Conflicts or the Fetus as Patient ​ Abortion as Maternal-Fetal Conflict: ○​ Abortion represents a conflict between the pregnant woman’s needs and the developing fetus, though this term also applies to conflicts after the woman decides to continue the pregnancy. ​ Pro-Life Viewpoint: ○​ Pregnant women have the same moral obligations to their fetuses as they do to their born children. ○​ They believe it is wrong to harm the fetus, which is considered an unborn child, and these obligations override personal or professional interests. ​ Pro-Choice Viewpoint: ○​ Pregnant women do not have moral obligations to the fetus, as the fetus lacks moral status, but once they decide to carry the pregnancy to term, they have responsibilities to ensure the child’s well-being. ○​ The moral line is drawn at the point of decision to have the child, not based on the fetus's stage of development. ​ Pregnant Women’s Responsibility: ○​ Once a woman decides to have a child, she is expected to avoid harmful behaviors (e.g., alcohol, drugs, extreme sports). ○​ The issue arises when a pregnant woman does not act responsibly—should she be coerced into specific behaviors or treatments to protect the fetus?  ​ Types of Maternal-Fetal Conflicts: ○​ Behavioral Conflicts: Actions by the pregnant woman that could harm the future child (e.g., substance use). ○​ Medical Treatment Conflicts: Medical interventions for the benefit of the fetus (e.g., fetal therapies, surgery, cesarean birth). ​ Key Ethical Questions: ○​ Should a pregnant woman’s behavior be constrained more than that of others? ○​ Can a woman be forced into medical treatments (e.g., surgery) for the fetus? ○​ Does the fetus have its own patient rights and does society have an interest in its well-being? ​ Conflict Between Autonomy and Beneficence: ○​ Tension between the woman's autonomy and society's interest in the fetus’s well-being. ○​ The fetus’s future autonomy and well-being also come into play in the ethical debate. ​ Legal and Physical Compulsion: ○​ The concept of forcing medical procedures (e.g., cesarean sections) to protect the fetus is debated. ○​ Libertarians oppose coercive measures, while communitarians may justify such actions for the common good. Maternal Behaviour and Fetal Protection ​ Historical Belief About the Placenta: ○​ Until recently, it was believed that the placenta protected the fetus from harmful substances in the mother's body. Now, it's understood that substances like smoking, alcohol, and recreational drugs can negatively affect fetal development. ​ Current Knowledge and Attitudes: ○​ Good nutrition, stress reduction, and avoiding substances like coffee, painkillers, alcohol, and drugs are now considered essential for a healthy pregnancy. ○​ Many women now avoid all potentially harmful substances during pregnancy, compared to attitudes 40 years ago when pregnancy behavior was less restricted. ​ Pregnant Women’s Responsibility: ○​ Some women, however, continue behaviors like smoking or drinking. This raises the question of whether they should be coerced or punished for these actions. ​ Legal Perspectives on Maternal Behavior: ○​ In the U.S., some states have "fetal rights" laws, which classify harmful behaviors during pregnancy as child abuse. ○​ On the other hand, some feminists and libertarians argue that a woman’s autonomy and privacy should take precedence, and her actions during pregnancy should be her choice. ​ Canadian Case (Ms. G):  ○​ In 1997, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a woman (Ms. G), who was addicted to glue sniffing while pregnant, could not be detained or forced into treatment to protect the fetus. ○​ The Court emphasized that the law only recognizes the rights of born individuals, and that a woman’s autonomy over her body must be respected. ​ U.S. Cases of Fetal Harm Prosecution: ○​ Some U.S. states have prosecuted women for "fetal harm" related to drug use during pregnancy. ○​ High-profile cases include the conviction of a woman for causing harm to her baby through drug use, and another where a mother was charged with murder after her stillborn baby tested positive for cocaine. ​ Debate on State Intervention: ○​ Some argue that prosecuting pregnant women for behaviors that may harm the fetus undermines their liberty rights. ○​ Concerns exist that increased state intervention could lead to extensive monitoring and policing of pregnant women’s behavior. ​ Rights of the Fetus vs. Maternal Autonomy: ○​ While most agree that pregnant women have a responsibility not to harm the fetus, there’s concern about the extent to which maternal rights should be limited. ○​ The central debate is whether the fetus has a right to be born unharmed or in optimal health, and whether this justifies state intervention in maternal behavior. Philosophical Reflection on Life, Soul, and Body ​ Catholic Church and Science: ○​ The Catholic Church changed its stance on abortion, moving from a distinction between an unformed and formed fetus to declaring that the soul is present from conception. ○​ This shift followed scientific advances in embryology, which found no clear stage at which the soul enters the body, leading to the notion that the fetus is human from conception. ​ Aristotle’s View of the Soul: ○​ Aristotle posited that all living beings have a soul, but in varying degrees: ​ Vegetative Soul (basic life functions like nourishment and reproduction) is shared by plants, animals, and humans. ​ Sensitive Soul (perception and movement) is present in animals and humans. ​ Rational Soul (thought and reasoning) is unique to humans. ○​ This hierarchy was influential in both Catholic and Islamic philosophy and was used to explain fetal development as moving through these levels. ​ René Descartes' Impact: ○​ Descartes, in the 17th century, moved away from Aristotle’s idea of soul, focusing on a mechanistic view of bodies (material) and minds (immaterial).  ○​ Descartes saw animals as "machines without souls" and humans as "machines with souls" (rational mind). ○​ His philosophy led to the mind-body problem, an unresolved issue about how mind and body interact. ​ Modern Scientific Views: ○​ Biologists and psychologists now largely explain life and consciousness without reference to the soul. ○​ There is no universally accepted definition of life, and biologists disagree on the origins of life, while psychologists remain uncertain about the nature of the mind. ​ Legacy of Aristotle’s Theory: ○​ Despite the decline of Aristotle’s hierarchy of souls, his model remains one of the most comprehensive ways to understand fetal development and life.