Why there is no dilemma for the birth strategy: a response to Bobier and Omelianchuk

Journal of Medical Ethics 49 (11):779-780 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Bobier and Omelianchuk argue that the Birth Strategy for addressing analogies between abortion and infanticide is saddled with a dilemma. It must be accepted that non-therapeutic late-term abortions are either, impermissible, or they are not. If accepted, then the Birth Strategy is undermined. If not, then the highly unintuitive claim that non-therapeutic late-term abortions are permissible must be accepted. I argue that the moral principle employed to defend the claim that non-therapeutic late-term abortions are morally impermissible fails to do so. Furthermore, the principle that people have a right to bodily autonomy can be used as an argument for the conclusion that non-therapeutic late-term abortions are permissible and is intuitively stronger than the intuition for the opposite of this conclusion. This is because people having a right to bodily autonomy explains the impermissibility of rape and sexual assault. Consequently, the posited dilemma is defused and does not undermine the Birth Strategy.

Author's Profile

Prabhpal Singh
University of Ottawa

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-01-02

Downloads
258 (#55,846)

6 months
132 (#21,748)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?