We asked, you answered: Is a third trimester abortion more immoral?
Abortions occurring as late as the third trimester are hotly contested and little understood. Secular Pro-Life has an entire collection of resources and articles on later abortion, including data from pro-choice organizations supporting elective later abortions. On a related note, we recently posted this on social media:
Some people asserted that third trimester abortions were always technically moral because most are only done for medical reasons (not true) or that it is irrelevant because so few later abortions occur (not the point).
Others gave insight into whether they felt both earlier and later abortions were equally immoral, whether both are moral, or whether there were other factors to consider, such as fetal pain and viability. Some of these responses are shared below:
Sasha Ross: Equally immoral, but the third trimester one is more senseless, as there is an obvious and easily obtainable alternative remedy for the problem of “can’t be pregnant anymore” which does not end any lives.
Jean Gallagher Heineman: Neither is immoral.
@PrenatalRights: No. Both are equally immoral as they both violate the right to life of a human being. How old you are does not change how okay it is to kill you. Third trimester abortion may be more visibly gruesome, but it is equally immoral to first trimester abortion.
Erik Wick: Technically an abortion is immoral at any time unless the mother’s life is at risk. Saving one life is more moral than letting two die via inaction. Outside of that situation (which statistically occurs in less than 5% of abortions in the US) it is immoral regardless of first, second, third trimester.
@kareneliza00: They are equally immoral. However, the more “human” the prenatal human seems, the more horrific it seems, and I do believe that suppressing the instinctive horror we should feel makes people more morally depraved.
Christopher Robbins: With respect to abstract moral principle, no. With respect to compassion and avoidance of causing suffering, then yes. I suppose the psychological impact on the mother could be more severe in the third trimester as well.
@anto_vallini: Of course it is because [it] is more painful and dangerous for the mother and because there isn’t any good reason to kill a viable fetus.
Sophie Song: Neither is inherently immoral.
Kelly Morgan: It’s immoral to force someone to endure a full term pregnancy against their will.
Pam Morgelt: Morality is subjective
Sara M Blenkinsuppe: Taking a plan b or abortion pill (when it’s in the time frame that it works) is less barbaric. Later term, they have to dig out the baby limb by limb, when their nerve endings are already developed or developing, they can feel it starting at 14 weeks.
NOTE: SPL does not believe Plan B to be abortifacient. You can learn more here.
Joe Wertman: An early abortion is not immoral at all, since an early fetus isn’t a sentient being who can be harmed by one’s actions. A later abortion is perhaps somewhat immoral, since there is sentience in the fetus at that point. However, it should still be legally permissible, the same way many other somewhat immoral things are in our societies.
Virginia Marie: I don’t think “immoral” is the right word to use. A better one is “horrifying.” I do think the abortion of a zygote/embryo is still terrible, and I’m sure their premature nervous system still senses danger to an extent. But a fetus will be in outright terror and pain as they are torn apart and tortured to death. There is a reason why some abortionists in Europe will give the baby pain relief if they ever do a third trimester abortion.
If you appreciate our work and would like to help, one of the most effective ways to do so is to become a monthly donor. You can also give a one-time donation here or volunteer with us here.
