5th Commentary - The Abortion Issue
This commentary is on the three articles on the issue of the abortion law.
The first article, entitled "Time to review abortion law", are the comments of Mr. Teo Chun Sang, who felt that abortions after the 24th week of pregnancy should be allowed if the unborn child is found to have major disabilities. The two other articles, one by Mr. Seto Hann Hoi ("Tighter laws needed to protect foetuses") and the other by Mr. Felix Ser ("Man with cerebral palsy offended by letter") were responses that were against what Mr. Teo had proposed in his letter.
It is my view that abortion should continue to be allowed under the current abortion law, only if the foetus has major disabilities or there is a grave risk to the life of the mother, but remain illegal after the 24th week, no matter what the issue is.
My first point about abortion being allowed for limited reasons is to stop people whose babies have no problems from aborting them. If these people did not want the child due to reasons like being too young, or because it was caused due to rape, they should give the baby up for adoption instead of thinking about aborting them. However, if doctors have found out that the baby would have major disabilities or that having the baby could be very dangerous for the mother, the choice of abortion should thus remain open, but only as a last option. It is my view that the decision should belong to the parents of the child, and not other people. After all, the child belonged to the parents, not some anti-abortion organization. The parents would have the right to make the decision, as they would be the ones raising the child, and it is their lives that would feel the greatest impact, economic or otherwise. However, they should still consider other options first, like adoption, as doing so is more humane. The baby should also be given a chance to live, as Mr. Ser states in his letter " A person wit severe physical disability can be of good intellect... A child with Down's syndrome can still learn how to draw well and contribute his physical labour." But in the end it is the parents who must decide.
The option of abortion should however remain limited to the first 24 weeks of pregnancy, as the baby is not as developed yet. The limit would also prevent people from choosing to have last minute abortions. Furthermore, it is known that a late stage abortion is much more risky to the life of the mother than an early stage abortion. Thus, the limit would prevent such dangers. The 24th week limit would also help strike a balance between the two groups of people  the pro-choice and the pro-life. This would also allow the current abortion law to remain more or less in effect.
A total ban is not feasible, as sometimes, it may be better for the mother to abort if having a child was likely to kill her. Although some people say that life begins at conception, and they prefer a total ban on abortions, I feel that even if it was so, the parents still held the responsibility of caring for the child, and so should decide if an abortion was the right choice, or not. Furthermore, it would be much safer for people to go for proper abortions than illegal ones done by uncertified doctors, which could cause the death of the mother if things were not done properly.
In conclusion, I feel that the abortion law should be tightened a little to allow abortions for babies with severe disabilities or if there was a grave threat to the mother's life, but continue to be limited to the 24th week of pregnancy. But overall, the choice remains with the parents, as they are the ones who have the responsibility, not other people.
The first article, entitled "Time to review abortion law", are the comments of Mr. Teo Chun Sang, who felt that abortions after the 24th week of pregnancy should be allowed if the unborn child is found to have major disabilities. The two other articles, one by Mr. Seto Hann Hoi ("Tighter laws needed to protect foetuses") and the other by Mr. Felix Ser ("Man with cerebral palsy offended by letter") were responses that were against what Mr. Teo had proposed in his letter.
It is my view that abortion should continue to be allowed under the current abortion law, only if the foetus has major disabilities or there is a grave risk to the life of the mother, but remain illegal after the 24th week, no matter what the issue is.
My first point about abortion being allowed for limited reasons is to stop people whose babies have no problems from aborting them. If these people did not want the child due to reasons like being too young, or because it was caused due to rape, they should give the baby up for adoption instead of thinking about aborting them. However, if doctors have found out that the baby would have major disabilities or that having the baby could be very dangerous for the mother, the choice of abortion should thus remain open, but only as a last option. It is my view that the decision should belong to the parents of the child, and not other people. After all, the child belonged to the parents, not some anti-abortion organization. The parents would have the right to make the decision, as they would be the ones raising the child, and it is their lives that would feel the greatest impact, economic or otherwise. However, they should still consider other options first, like adoption, as doing so is more humane. The baby should also be given a chance to live, as Mr. Ser states in his letter " A person wit severe physical disability can be of good intellect... A child with Down's syndrome can still learn how to draw well and contribute his physical labour." But in the end it is the parents who must decide.
The option of abortion should however remain limited to the first 24 weeks of pregnancy, as the baby is not as developed yet. The limit would also prevent people from choosing to have last minute abortions. Furthermore, it is known that a late stage abortion is much more risky to the life of the mother than an early stage abortion. Thus, the limit would prevent such dangers. The 24th week limit would also help strike a balance between the two groups of people  the pro-choice and the pro-life. This would also allow the current abortion law to remain more or less in effect.
A total ban is not feasible, as sometimes, it may be better for the mother to abort if having a child was likely to kill her. Although some people say that life begins at conception, and they prefer a total ban on abortions, I feel that even if it was so, the parents still held the responsibility of caring for the child, and so should decide if an abortion was the right choice, or not. Furthermore, it would be much safer for people to go for proper abortions than illegal ones done by uncertified doctors, which could cause the death of the mother if things were not done properly.
In conclusion, I feel that the abortion law should be tightened a little to allow abortions for babies with severe disabilities or if there was a grave threat to the mother's life, but continue to be limited to the 24th week of pregnancy. But overall, the choice remains with the parents, as they are the ones who have the responsibility, not other people.
posted by Raylen at 5:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home