Answer

Case Study: Fetal Abnormality

            According to the Christian view of the nature of human persons, life is sacred. Human beings, including human embryos are argued as having a specific standing before God (Gill, 2020). Genesis 1 verses 26 to 31 states that God made man and woman in His image. It that case human beings were created in the likeness of God. However humans were not created to possess God’s qualities such as His omniscience and power. Humans have the capacity to reason, power over creation, creativity, choice or freedom, and sociability (Clauson, 2015). Therefor Conceptualization of the human nature is described by three biblical concepts derived from the biblical-theological model. The first concept states that human beings are the living breath of God. The second concept states that human beings are covenantal beings. The third concept is that human beings are created in the image of God. All human beings, including human embryos, have a moral status. In that sense, human embryo should be considered as a neighbor in which case the commandment of the neighborly love should be observed (Gill, 2020).

The Christian view on the human nature is compatible with deontological (duty) moral theory or Kant’s ethical theory (Gill, 2020). Duty theory affirms that moral standards are founded on the ground that intuitive duties or obligations that individuals have. Duty theory emphasizes that one should follow set of moral rules instinctively and discover through human reasoning. According to this duty ethic, humans have to obey an absolute command to protect life. It is morally right to carry the pregnancy to term, regardless of private desires or consequences (Fieser, 2017). Kant’s ethical theory demands that human beings should be directed by a rule that being completely independent of moral content of the actions may become a universal rule of behavior. The only aspect that gives an action moral value is the motive behind it but not the outcome that is achieved (Kelechilwuagwu, 2019).

Deontological moral theory protects the sense of intrinsic human value and dignity. Human embryos are regarded as having fundamental human rights and human dignity (Gill, 2020). Deontological perspective puts forward the principle of self-worth, dignity, and/or self-value of every person that must not be sacrificed at any cost. The intrinsic value and dignity of any person must not be surrendered even for the good of the society. Therefore, it implies that the pregnancy should not be sacrificed for the good of Jessica and Marco or to save the unborn from poor quality of life due to lack of all arms (Kelechilwuagwu, 2019).

Jessica and Maria used uses deontological moral theory that views life as sacred and having inherent value; thus, must be protected and preserved regardless of consequences.  In this case, the fetus is seen as having a moral status and dignity. Both Maria and Jessica perceive that they have a duty to ensure that God’s will be respected. Thus, Jessica and Maria reject the idea of abortion (Kelechilwuagwu, 2019). Supporting evidence from the case study for the choice of the moral theory is that Jessica beliefs that all life is sacred while Maria beliefs that it is what “God intends” to take place and pleads with Jessica to carry on the pregnancy as a mother. In that case, Jessica beliefs that she has a duty to keep her pregnancy since life are sacred while Maria thinks that Jessica has a duty of motherhood, regardless of consequences.  According to Maria, Jessica ought to carry the pregnancy to term simply because she has a duty to be a mother to her child, regardless of the consequences. Deontological moral theory influences both Jessica and Maria to reject the recommendation (abortion) for action (Gill, 2020).

Conversely, Dr. Wilson and Marco use utilitarian moral perspective to develop the course of action to solve the case. In utilitarianism, right and wrong are judged based on the overall goodness or utility an action. The consequences of an action are important and so long as the consequences are favorable, an action is perceived as morally right. In this moral perspective, no action is intrinsically wrong or right. Best consequences can be achieved even if the action taken is not desirable (Gill, 2020). Dr. Wilson is that view that abortion is a responsible medical alternative since the unborn is deemed to live poor quality of life. In addition, Dr. Wilson argues that abortion is medically and scientifically wise option given the circumstances faced by Jessica and Marco. Similarly, Marco is ready to support Jessica for any decision she will take but is of the view that the expected disabled child will be a burden and that it will be a barrier to achievement of economic security and future plans. Thus, both Dr. Wilson and Marco support the utilitarian view that abortion will lead to achievement of desirable consequences. Using utilitarian views, Marco is ready to support Dr. Wilson’s recommendation for abortion to be carried out.

            Considering the situation and the fact that the expected baby will be born without any arms, I do agree with the utilitarian course of action. Abortion is the best solution for saving the baby from living a life of complete dependency and overall poor quality of life. Besides, the baby may be a burden and barrier for the Marco and Jessica to achieve economic security and financial stability. Course of actions that are in line with economic and democratic principles reflect utilitarianism (Gill, 2020). Utilitarian theory will support the decision to terminate the pregnancy as recommended by Dr. Wilson.