Cursed lamp: the problem of spontaneous abortion

Abstract

Many people believe human fetuses have the same moral status as adult human persons, that it is wrong to allow harm to befall things with this moral status, and thus voluntary, induced abortion is seriously morally wrong. Recently, many prochoice theorists have argued that this antiabortion stance is inconsistent; approximately 60% of human fetuses die from spontaneous abortion, far more than die from induced abortion, so if antiabortion theorists really believe that human fetuses have significant moral status, they have strong moral obligations to oppose spontaneous abortion. Yet, few antiabortion theorists devote any effort to doing so. Many prochoice theorists argue that to resolve this inconsistency, antiabortion theorists should abandon their opposition to induced abortion. Here, I argue that those who do not abandon their opposition to induced abortion but continue to neglect spontaneous abortion act immorally. Aristotle argues that moral responsibility requires both control and awareness; I argue that once an antiabortion theorist becomes aware of the frequency of spontaneous abortion, they have a strong moral obligation to redirect their efforts towards combating spontaneous abortion; failure to do so is morally monstrous.

Within the limits of the defensible: a response to Simkulet’s argument against the pro-life view on the basis of spontaneous abortion

“…While (2), as he formulates it here, does not necessarily ‘show that contemporary opposition to abortion is misguided’, I nevertheless believe that his interpretation of the meaning of working ‘to prevent both spontaneous and voluntary, induced abortions’ is in conflict with the standard abortion view as he seems to claim that (2) means that proponents of the anti-abortion view ‘have comparable moral obligation to oppose spontaneous abortion’ as induced abortion (Simkulet, p. 785) 1 . i The aim of this reply is to demonstrate that one can hold on to an anti-abortion view while still rejecting (2).…”

“…Simkulet organises the responses into six different categories: the numbers response, the control principle response, the visibility response, the causing/allowing response, the weak obligation response and, finally, the asymmetrical response (Simkulet, p. 785) 1. I will set the former three aside, as I think that they have no (the visibility response), quite weak (the numbers response) or some, but not sufficiently strong (control principle response), normative force and focus entirely on the latter three.…”

“…However, the normative force of the objection from spontaneous abortion can be maintained if its claim is revised: instead of a comparable obligation, the implication of the anti-abortion view can be claimed to be that our obligations to prevent spontaneous abortion are sufficiently significant to justify a radical redistribution of medical resources (Simkulet, p790) 1. Also in this revised version, the argument from spontaneous abortion challenges the plausibility of the anti-abortion view, and the question is whether the other two responses under consideration can offer support.…”

“…According to him, ‘[e]ither horn of the dilemma seems to show that contemporary opposition to abortion is misguided’ (Simkulet, p. 785) 1. While (2), as he formulates it here, does not necessarily ‘show that contemporary opposition to abortion is misguided’, I nevertheless believe that his interpretation of the meaning of working ‘to prevent both spontaneous and voluntary, induced abortions’ is in conflict with the standard abortion view as he seems to claim that (2) means that proponents of the anti-abortion view ‘have comparable moral obligation to oppose spontaneous abortion’ as induced abortion (Simkulet, p. 785) 1 .…”

The Two tragedies argument

“…Recently, critics argue that the frequency of spontaneous abortions poses a problem for pro-life theorists, as critics of abortion tend to focus exclusively on preventing induced abortions, and largely neglect spontaneous abortions 8–14. I have argued this focus on induced abortion results from ignorance about spontaneous abortion, and when confronted with new information about the frequency of spontaneous abortion, pro-life theorists ought to oppose both induced and spontaneous abortion 14. Due to the scale of the problem (and the lack of serious philosophical opposition), even minor investments in research, reasonable efforts to educate others about the threat and/or moderate advances in preventing spontaneous abortion would prevent far more tragedies than contemporary efforts to prevent induced abortion.…”