Elements of African Bioethics in a Western Frame

3. THE ABORTION DEBATE: ETHICS, CUSTOM AND LAW IN INTERACTION

~ 29 ~ CHAPTER THREE THE ABORTION DEBATE: ETHICS, CUSTOM AND LAW IN INTERACTION [This chapter was first published in the Journal “Biodiagnostics and Therapy, Magazine Bilingue de Sante Publique au Cameroun” in March 2002] PREAMBLE The last quarter of the 20th century witnessed a significant shift of emphasis in global philosophical trends from concern with overly theoretical issues to more practical matters. Bioethics, the study of the ethical, social and legal issues arising from existence, life and the biological sciences, is one of the fruits, among many others, of this shift in philosophical emphasis. It has brought philosophers down from the ever shifting clouds of sterile speculation to the firm ground of life and death issues and, at the same time, raised ordinary men and women of the mundane world to the realms of inevitable philosophical reasoning, if not speculation. That human beings are at the apex of biological existence is a claim that is sometimes dismissed as too arrogant a claim and has often been contested by some militants of the rights of plants and/or animals. But this claim can be considered merely as a perceptible datum, from the point of view of morality. One way to easily realize this is to consider the fact that, while human beings have putative moral responsibilities towards plants and animals, these latter cannot be considered, without absurdity, as having any reciprocal moral obligations towards humans. The consequence of humankind´s position as the summit of biological life, as we know it, is that it bears alone on its shoulders the whole weight of moral obligation and responsibility for the biological world. Reproduction is crucially important for all living things. All living things reproduce themselves and also die. Without reproducing, living things would go out of existence. Reproduction is thus a central area of bioethical concern and human reproduction can further be considered as the nucleus or epicentre of that domain, since human beings bear the whole weight of moral responsibility for the entire biological world. That responsibility may justify human ~ 30 ~ intervention in the biological world, although that does not imply that every conceivable intervention is justifiable. In this chapter, I consider the main positions for and against abortion. I argue that ethics, laws, customs and religious injunctions need to be constantly revised in the light of reason. Further, I argue that, if we start from ordinary, disinterested, commonsensical reason, the rationally most defensible position on abortion lies somewhere midway between the extremes. INTRODUCTION Of all controversial issues within human reproduction, there is scarcely any which generates so much heat, fervour and interest as abortion. This, indeed, is an issue on which many people seem to have a vested interest, to take a strong stand, rationally justifiable or not; an issue over which the emotions, non-rational instincts and extra-ethical considerations may easily put reason to flight. It is also here, more than anywhere else, that people may be prone to akrasia or moral backsliding, that perplexing condition in which a moral agent knowingly and willingly does what s/he knows and accepts s/he ought not to do. The abortion debate has been greatly complicated by the existence of divergent ethical convictions, cultural practices, customs, laws, religious dogmas and economic motives. The United Nations International Conference on Population and Development (Cairo, Egypt, 5-13 Sept. 1994) greatly helped in bringing out some of these divergences and contradictions into play, before, during and after its work. An ethical conviction is not necessarily equivalent to what is morally right, although it is justifiable for the individual always to act according to her/his ethical convictions. That may sound contradictory and has the consequence that one may act according to onés ethical convictions and still be morally wrong in onés action. Let me try to clarify the issue by making the following terminological stipulations. Ethics is a subset of morality that can be considered as being concerned most generally with right and wrong in relation to human conduct. Morality as such is based on human reason or rationality (the ultimate means by which right and wrong may be known) and the social nature of human beings. Freedom and the ability to make choices are essential for morality. Rationality and sociality are the defining and distinguishing characteristics of the ~ 31 ~ human person and freedom defines the sphere of morally responsible actions. Human beings are, by nature, both rational and social...