Decease… Death… Die…

They say, that there are four the most important criteria of the moral status, they are intrinsic value, vitality, the reaction for irritants and rationality. The first criterion, intrinsic value, must be rejected because it, in itself, cannot without the corresponding theory (which explains the notion of intrinsic value) be applied for the determination of the moral status. The second criterion is insufficient on the strength of the fact that it is applied to too wide circle of objects to which the moral status would be attributed. Of course, the morality with the notions of interests, good, duty must be attributed only to living beings, but these living beings to become the moral entities, they must be conscious as well. The next criterion, rationality, is probably, too narrow because it is excluding the whole classes of living conscious beings, which (not being rational, for example, animals) must be under the morality’s defense. That’s why rationality is enough but not necessary condition for holding the moral status. Therefore, there is the last criterion, the reaction for irritants, which is understood in the narrow meaning as an ability to feel pleasure and pain, pleasant and not pleasant. The choice of this criterion as a basis for the determination of the moral status of fetus and its right for life, allows tying the rational moral assessment of the pregnancy’s interception with the stage of ability’s development of fetus to react to irritants. This criterion opens the possibility for solving many other problems, as for example, attitude towards animals, towards children with inborn mental defects, towards terminally ill people who are on the border between life and death. This also allows us to specify certain difficult and delicate questions concerning euthanasia. And as for the applying of this criterion to the solving of the question about the attitude towards abortion, so first of all, it is possible to set existing difference between early and late pregnancies’ termination (from the moral point of view). Scientists state, the border, where the fetus’ reaction to irritants begins to form, this is the second term of pregnancy, three-six months.

By the way, people absolutely in different ways estimate the applying of contraceptives and the killing of the newborns. Contraceptives are acceptable and legal, and the second is a crime. The acknowledgement of the fact that fetus gains the full moral status in the second term of pregnancy allows absolutely differently estimate (from the moral point of view) abortion during early and late terms of pregnancies. Early termination of pregnancy from the moral point of view is closer to the estimation of applying the contraceptives, the late termination of pregnancy can be considered as almost like deprivation of life of the newborn creature.

Of course, it is impossible not to see the huge difference between infanticide and deprivation of life of unborn fetus. The deprivation of life of the unborn fetus sometimes can be caused by such reasons as the threat for life and health of mother and there is also a big probability that a baby can appear to this world being terminally ill and doomed to suffering and death. That’s why legal permission for termination of pregnancy in the late terms can be based at such principles, like, for example, the acknowledgement of killing as “just” in case of self-defense and euthanasia.

Go to next page…