Mohammad Rasekh Corresponding Author
- Department of Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

Received: 7/1/2003 Accepted: 7/1/2003 - Publisher : Avicenna Research Institute

Related Articles


Other Format



Despite decades of hard attempts of our predecessors during the last century, resulting in a thought and system of human rights at both national and international level, we still witness emotional, violent and irrational conflict and fight between opponents and proponents of abortion. This practical battle could not be tackled unless one probes in depth into theoretical foundations of the subject so as to construct a justifiable view in this regard. For this aim, this article attempt to set forth claims of major theories of abortion and also to evaluate those claims. Accordingly, at first stage, the problem of abortion will be depicted from a theoretical perspective. Secondly, as one of the oldest theories, “theory of life sacredness” shall be delineated. This attitude is known as the pro-life theory. Also, it is worth noting that many of religious/ethical claims are put forward in this term. Thirdly, ”theory of free-will” in defense of abortion will be explicated. This theory, known as the pro-choice attitude, has been a vehicle for most of liberal and feminist claims on the issue. It appears that the last mentioned two theories have taken a general and simple stance for or against the termination of fetus life. Could one avoid such a simple and general attitude and take another stance? Fourthly, and in this regard, “theory of investment value” that approaches to the problem in a different way, shall be elucidated. From this perspective, the question of termination of fetus life is entirely dependent on the amount of investment and it’s value. Fifthly, another theory that endeavors to put forth a different analysis of the problem, “theory of person or conscious entity” shall be spelled out. Advocates of such a theory make an effort to sufficiently attend to all constituent elements of the problem – such as freedom, life, value of investment, parents and fetus – that might seem conflicting or even contradictory. Finally, it will be attempted to make a conclusion. Abortion, entangled between facts related to emotions, population growth rate and economics, on one hand, and religious, ideological and ethical value judgments, on the other, requires a theoretical attention by scholars and policy makers of a “human” and “dynamic” society.

Keywords: Abortion, Life sacredness theory, Free-will theory, Investment value theory, Person or conscious entity theory

To cite this article:


  1. www.azrtl.org.
  2. Fieser & Dowden. Abortion in Law, History and Religion.
  3. BBC News, Monday, 4.March 2002. on http:// news.bbc.co.uk./hi/English/worid Europe/newsid 1849000/1849395.stm
  4. Dougherty.The Concept of ‘Person’ in American Legal Theory.
  5. Hyams.Who Gets to Choose? Responses to the Foetal/Maternal Conflict.
  6. Thomson J.J. Abortion.2000. on http://www. bostonreview.mit.edu.
  7. Stairs A. warren M.A. Abortion and the Concept of a Person. 1997.on http://brindedcow.utm/edu/140/warren.htm.
  8. Peach L. Legislating Morality. Oxford, OUP. 2002.
  9. Suber P. Against the Sanctity of Life.1995.onhttp://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/snactity. html.
  10. Steinbock B. Mother-Fetus Conflict, in A Companion to Bioethics. Kushe H.& Singer P. (Editors)Oxford, Blackwell.2001.
  11. Chin F. A Pro-Life Belief. 2002. on http://www.hoestead .com/crumb o/prolife.html.
  12. Beckwith F.J. Answering the Arguments for Abortion Rights: (part One The Appeal to pity. 1990. on http://www.equip.org/free/da020-2.htm.
  13. Sullivan M.A. Thirty year perspective on personhood: How has DebateChanged?. 2002. on http://www.cedrvile.edu/dept/sm/sulivan /bio4710/personal/perspec tive.pdf
  14. Beckwith F.J Answering the Arguments for Abortion Rights: (Part Three) Is the Unborn Human Less Than Human?.1990. on http://www.equip.org/free/da020-3.htm.
  15. Beckwith F.J. Abortion, Bio-Ethics and Personhood.2000. on http://www.cbhd.org/ index.html.
  16. Marquis, D. Why Abortion is Immoral? J Philosophy. 1989;80(4):183-202.
  17. Beckwith F.J. Answering the Arguments for Abortion Rights:(Part Four) When Does a Human Become a Person?. 1990.on http://www.equip.org/ free/da020-4.htm.
  18. Gordon D. Abortion and Rights: Applying Libertaian Principles Correctly.1999.on http:// www.141.org/library/abor-rts.html.
  19. Green F.M.Person or Non-Person.2000.on http://californialife.org/abortion/person.html.
  20. Beckwith F.J.Answering the Arguments for Abortion Rights: (Part Two)Arguments from Pity, Tolerance and Ad Hominem.1990.on http://www.equip.org free.da020-2.htm.
  21. Stairs A.Jane English on Abortion and Attitudes.1998. on http://brindedcow.umd.edu/190/ english.html.
  22. Dworkin R. Life’s Dominion: An Argument about Abortion and Euthanasia,London: Harper Collins Publishers. 1993.
  23. Warren A.M. Abortion, in Companin to Bioethics, ed. By H. Kushe & P. Singer,Oxford: Blackwell. 2001.
  24. Stephens P. Human Cloning: When is a Person a Person?.2002. on http://www.objectivcenter.org/ mediacenter/articles/pstephens-human-cloning-person.asp
  25. Hope D. The Hand as Emblem of Human Identity. in Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law.1999;6(1).on http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v6n1/hopes61-text.html.
  26. Burgess J.A & Tawia, S.A. When Did You First Begin to Feel It? Locating the Beginning of Human Consciousness. Bioethics.1996;10(1):1-26.
  27. Harris J. The Value of Life, London: Routledge. 1992.
  28. CARAL. About the Fetus, Canadian Abortion Rights League. 2002. on http://www.caral.calfacts/ responses. php#ANRT
  29. Vieira E. The Right of Abortion: A Dogma in Serach of a Rationale.1978. on http://www.141.org /library.
  30. Elroy M.B. Why Abortion Is Moral?. 2002. on http://www.elroy.net/her/index.html.
  31. Boyle D. Warren on Abortion. 2001. on http://www.cofc.edu/~boyled/warren.html.
  32. Warren, A.M. 2002.On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion, on http://faculty.mc3.edu/ barmstro/warren.html.
  33. Arthur J. Personhood: Is a Fetus a Human Being?. 2001. on http://prochice actionwork-canada.org.
  34. راسخ محمد.آزادي چون ارزش، حق و مصلحت.1381، طرح نو، صفحة 299-276.
  35. Thomson J.J A Defence of Abortion. 1971. on http://www.users.telerama.com/~jdehllu/abortion/absjthol.htm.
  36. Annas G. Standard of Care: The Law of American Bioethics. NY.1993.
  37. Gordon D. What Do Abortion Choicers Mean When They Tell Us: Let’s the Government out of Our Lives?. 1996. on http://www.141.org/library/ abor-rts.html.
  38. Schwarz S.D. The Moral Question of Abortion. 1990. on http://www.ohiolife.org/mqa/toc/asp.
  39. Lauritzen P. Neither Person nor Property.2001. on http://americapress.org/articles/lauritzen.htm.
  40. Tooley M. Personhood, in A Companion to Bioethics. Kushe H.& Singer P.(editors). Oxford, Blackwell. 2001.
  41. Glendon M.A. Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Discourse. NY, FP.1991.
  42. Walker J. Abortion and the Question of the Person.2000. on http://www.141.org/library/abor-per.htm.
  43. راسخ محمد،شخص: محل تلاقي حقوق، فلسفه و پزشكي، حق و مصلحت.1381، طرح نو.
  44. Dennett D.C. Brainstorms: Philosophical Essays on Mind and Psychology, Brighton: Harvester Press.1986.
  45. Ryle G. The Concept of Mind, London: Penguin Books.1990.
  46. Churchland P.M. Matter and Consciousness: A Contemporary Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.1994.
  47. Kaczor. C.Judge Noona on Abortion.2002. on http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/faculty/ckaczor/nooonan. htm.
  48. Moody T.Person, Identity, and Abortion. 2002. on http://www.sju.edu/~tmoody/abortion.htm.
  49. DeGrazia D. Great Apes, Dolphins, and the Concept of Personhood. The S J Philosophy. XXXV.1997;301-20.
  50. Rawls J. Political Liberalism. NY,CUP.1993.


Home | About Us | Current Issue | Past Issues | Submit a Manuscript | Instructions for Authors | Subscribe | Search | Contact Us

"Journal of Reproduction & Infertility" is owned, published, and managed by Avicenna Research Institute .
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution –NonCommercial 4.0 International License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.

Journal of Reproductoin and Infertility (JRI) is a member of COMMITTEE ON PUBLICATION ETHICS . Verify here .

©2024 - eISSN : 2251-676X, ISSN : 2228-5482, For any comments and questions please contact us.