is a moral dilemma that is wedged between Christian beliefs and science. No one
has the right to take life. That said, taking the life of another person, even if it is a fetus, is
wrong. Nina discussed the exceptions well. In case of health risk for the mother or for the
unborn baby, or where there are mental health issues, there could be well considered
exceptions, not a norm.
Nina brought attention to the fact that not all are Christians. I am a Hindu by faith. I also
studied in a Christian convent and I have both religious beliefs installed in me. According
the Upanishads, in particular the Mahanarayana Upanishad, considers abortion as
breaking one’s own chastity. British Broadcasting Corporation has conveyed its view on
one of the programs that when considering abortion, the Hindu way is to choose the action
that will do least harm to all involved: the mother and father, the fetus and society.
Classical Hindu texts are strongly opposed to abortion. It is really hurting when we hear
about female feticide and sex-selective abortion practiced in several cultures. That brings
us back to the orginial question – is it your right to take the life of another human being,
however young it may be.
Preservation of Life
Terminating a pregnancy or feticide due to congenital malformations is morally and
ethically a social challenge and possibly viewed as illicit in nations with strictly restrictive laws
on abortion (Cerovac et al. 2019). Modalities used in diagnosis, which include: MRI, CT-scan
and ultrasound, and genomic screening, have improved prenatal analysis. These advancements
are still widely unavailable in numerous African nations, which makes’ it challenging to counsel
and direct (Termination of pregnancy) cases controversial and difficult (Cerovac et al. 2019).
Moral predicaments, including women’s independent rights, may counter with a fetus’ right to
existence, and a doctor’s ethical commitments to society.
No human possess more rights existentially to life than another, but experience in the
medical field occasionally seems to counter the above statement. Critical and controversial
Preservation of Life 2
decisions have to be deliberated in cases where a mother’s life is in jeopardy. The only option is
to terminate the fetus to save the mother’s life. Medically the decision is standard and widely
accepted in practice. However, the same decision contravenes religious norms that are absolute
when it comes to preserving life.
Moreover, even in worse cases, medical advancements have been wrongly utilized in
ending the numerous live of fetuses as a result of sex/gender bias as carried out in China and
India. All possible measures should be taken to preserve life, but medically that can be at times
be impossible when the life of an individual almost wholly depends on the other. Religion
provides stringent laws on abortion, which are highly noble but often crossroads with medical
decisions, yet somehow agree that all life is equal.
Cerovac, A., Serak, A., Zukic, H., Nevacinovic, E., Ljuca, D., Brigic, A., & Habek, D. (2019).
Ethical and legal dilemmas around termination of pregnancy for severe fetal
hydrocephalus, spina bifida aperta, and meningomyelocele. Medical Archives, 73(2),