During Judith Jarvis Thomson’s argument about the ethics of abortions and “A Defense of Abortion”, Thomas states that UDH’s are recognized as a full person and a full persons should enjoy a “right to life.” Her standards in cases come out to remain within the range of moral permissibility. “Every person has a right to life. So the fetus has a right to life. No doubt the mother has a right to decide what shall happen in and to her body; everyone would grant that. But surely a person’s right to life is stronger and more stringent than the mother’s right to decide what happens in and to her body, and so outweighs it” (48). With her saying arguing this, she is just making the line of argument easier to understand. Thomas states six different moral arguments to show extreme view is inconsistent with the morals of one person. The Violinist, the growing baby, Smith’s Coat, Henry Fonda, The burglar, and people-seeds. These each give a meaning to abortion and explain to one how and what is wrong with abortion. But Margaret Olivia Little argument disagrees with Thomas. Little declares that UDH’s lack many features of a full persons. “I believe that early abortion is fully permissible, widely decent, and, indeed, can be honorable” (148). Since UDH’s would not exist without their mother, that is where Little’s question becomes different. Little emphasizes the often neglected impacts and risks associated with pregnancy. Medical, social, personal are some of the things Little argues about. Little lastly argues that abortions can be honorable when the potential mother thinking about the UDH, not just because the child would be better off never existing, but to have better ideals of parenthood. She gives examples like not bring someone into the world unwelcome or not bring someone into abject poverty or war. “Of course, if one could end the assistance without effecting death, then, absent extraordinary circumstances, one should” (151). This essay could be plagiarized. Get your custom essay “Dirty Pretty Things” Acts of Desperation: The State of Being Desperate 122 writers ready to help you now Get Original Paper Without paying upfront Sidney Callahan argues that accessibility to abortion is inconsistent with “maternal thinking” and undermines interests of the fairer sex. She presents what ethicists as “maternal thinking.” “Maternal thinking is loosely defined as a responsible commitment to the loving nurture of specific human beings as they actually exist in socially embedded interpersonal contexts. It is a moral perspective very different from the abstract, competitive, isolated, and principled rigidity so characteristic of patriarchy” (118). Everybody has the right to control one’s body. Callahan’s comes back to say that when being pregnant, two patients intertwined cannot capture. She states that “having a baby is not like rescuing a drowning person, being hooked up to a famous violinist’s artificial life-support system, donating organs for transplant—or anything else” (118). She also brings up the importance of autonomy, such as the ability to make mature commitments like “family, work or education” requires full control over our reproductive state, which implies abortion must be readily accessible (117). She replies that responsibilities are determined by circumstance, not choice. “A woman, involuntarily pregnant, has a moral obligation to the now-existing dependent fetus whether she explicitly consented to its existence or not… the fetus possesses rights arising from its extreme need and the interdependency and unity of human kind” (120). John T. Noonan argues that abortion is only morally permissible when necessary to save the life of the mother because UDH’s have a high probability of developing their capacity for autonomy. Noonan describes abortion issue with a primary question: “How do you determine the humanity of a being?” This question concludes that genetic code possessed at any post-conception. Noonan also points out that UDH’s do not always survive during pregnancy. If women seek abortions for reasons other than to save their own life, Noonan argues that it is cruel and selfish.