Question

For months doctors told eleven-year-old Visna (as we’ll call her) and her parents that her abdominal pains were nothing but indigestion. Then in July 1998 the truth finally emerged—Visna was twenty-seven weeks pregnant.

Visna’s family had emigrated from India to the Detroit suburb of Sterling Heights, Michigan, only the previous summer. Her parents found factory jobs and rented a two-bedroom apartment, and Visna shared one of the rooms with Hari, her sixteen-year-old brother. Sometime during the winter after their arrival in the United States, Visna told her parents that Hari had raped her, but this emerged only after Visna, who had turned twelve, was found to be pregnant.

As soon as Bisn’s parents learned her condition, they made plans to take her to Kansas for an abortion. Visna would have to have a late-term abortion, and because Michigan law bans almost all abortions after twenty-four weeks, her family would have to take her out of state. But their plans were frustrated when they were leaked to a family court judge. Charges of parental negligence were filed by prosecutors against her parents, and the court immediately removed Visna from her family and made her a ward of the state.

At a court hearing, Visna’s doctor argued that if her pregnancy were allowed to continue, it could cause her both physical and psychological damage. A psychologist testified that because Visna was a Hindu, if she were forced to have an illegitimate child, it would make her unfit for marriage by another Hindu. Her parents also expressed their worry that if Visna had a child, the child might suffer from genetic abnormalities and, in particular, might be mentally retarded, because her brother was the father.

At the end of the hearing the prosecution announced it was convinced pregnancy might endanger Visna’s life and dropped the negligence charge against her parents. Visna was reunited with her family, and her parents pursued their original plan of taking her to Kansas. In Wichita, Dr. George Tiller, who had been shot in 1993 by a pro-life activist, stopped the fetus’s heart and used drugs to induce labor, thus performing a "partial-birth" abortion.

1. Reading Comprehension

For this case what would each of the following authors hold and WHY : Provide a paragraph on each explaining their positions and use some quotations.

• A. Don Marquis
• B. Sidney Callahan,
• C. Peter Alward

Answer 1

Don marquis:

Position-Don Marquis is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Kansas. He safeguards the view that, with the exception of in uncommon conditions, premature birth is genuinely off-base.

The motivation behind this paper is to set out a contention the case that premature birth, aside from maybe in occasions, is genuinely wrong. One explanation behind these special cases is to wipe out from thought cases whose moral investigation ought to be disputable nitty gritty for lucid adversaries of abortion. Such cases incorporate premature birth after assault and premature birth during the initial fourteen days after origination when there is a contention that the hatchling isn't an individual. Another purpose behind causing these exemptions to take into account those cases in which the admissibility of premature birth is perfect with the contention of this essay. Such cases incorporate premature birth when continuation of a pregnancy imperils a lady's life and when the baby is anencephalic.

His quotation-

-Stalling is the specialty of staying aware of yesterday" ...

-"On the off chance that you make individuals believe they're supposing, they'll cherish you; But on the off chance that you truly make them think, they'll loathe you." ...

"When a man reveals to you that he got rich through diligent work, ask him: 'Whose?"

2) sidney

Position-

Sidney and Dan Callahan were pioneers. The endeavors of this dynamic a couple group prompted the establishing of the Hastings Center, presently the head place on the planet to think about bioethics. A key minute came in 1968, when Dan got an award from the Ford Foundation to do far reaching exploration and produce Abortion: Law, Choice and Mortality. This came when premature birth was simply warming up as a national issue, with Roe v. Wade (which would finish up refering to his book) coming a negligible five years after the fact. After quite a long time after month, all day every day, Dan and Sidney would discussion and contend about the thoughts he was investigating in the book. After the exploration and contending was finished, Dan reached an "ace decision" resolution, while Sidney concluded that she was "ace life." Indeed, after her better half's book turned out in help of premature birth rights, Sidney reacted not just by giving the scholarly help behind the now broadly well known and effective group Feminists for Life but likewise by reacting to a portion of her significant other's contentions.

quotation:, "Fetus removal and the Sexual Agenda: The Case for Prolife Feminism"

3) Peter Alward:

Peter Alward (born 1964) is a Canadian rationalist and Professor and Head of Philosophy Department at the University of Saskatchewan. He is known for his works on philosophy of fiction, philosophy of art and environmental philosophy. In 2016 Alward was granted Tenured Professor Essay Prize by The Canadian Philosophical Association

quote

"I have been looking for an approach to acquaint understudies with theory that familiarizes them with both the style of philosophical thinking and the sorts of issues that request philosophical consideration