Article Text
Response
Egalitarianism, moral status and abortion: a reply to Miller
Abstract
Calum Miller recently argued that a commitment to a very modest form of egalitarianism—equality between non-disabled human adults—implies fetal personhood. Miller claims that the most plausible basis for human equality is in being human—an attribute which fetuses have—therefore, abortion is likely to be morally wrong. In this paper, I offer a plausible defence for the view that equality between non-disabled human adults does not imply fetal personhood. I also offer a challenge for Miller’s view.
- Abortion - Induced
- Ethics- Medical
- Fetus
- Infanticide
- Moral Status
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors JR is the sole author of this work.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Fetuses, newborns, & parental responsibility
- Genetic enhancement, post-persons and moral status: a reply to Buchanan
- Subhumans, human flourishing and abortion: a reply to Räsänen
- Infanticide and moral consistency
- A Moorean argument for the full moral status of those with profound intellectual disability
- Infanticide: a reply to Giubilini and Minerva
- Of course the baby should live: against ‘after-birth abortion’
- A dualist analysis of abortion: personhood and the concept of self qua experiential subject
- Moral uncertainty and the farming of human-pig chimeras
- Parental responsibilities and moral status