Abortion: Deontological Ethics And Nonmaleficence

Introduction My personal ethics include deontological ethics, beneficence, and nonmaleficence, all of which can be utilized in professional ethics. However, personal and professional ethics may clash in difficult healthcare dilemmas, so it is important to distinguish between them. Deontological ethics can be referred to as “duty-based ethics” because it concentrates on a person’s duties to others, telling the truth, and keeping promises (Pozgar, 2016, p. 11). Beneficence is the principle of doing good, displaying kindness and compassion, and helping others. Lastly, nonmaleficence requires caregivers to avoid causing harm to patients. It is translated “first, do no harm” (Pozgar, 2016, p. 21).
This paper will discuss abortion to outline my …show more content…
Abortion goes against my view of beneficence because in doing so, the physician does not help or demonstrate kindness toward the unborn child. It also contradicts nonmaleficence for the child because it harms the child, it ends the new life. Physicians swear by the oath of Hippocrates pledging to do no harm to all their patients. Some could argue that abortion does not violate the ethical principle of nonmaleficence for the mother if her health is at stake; however, the lives of the child and mother are both invaluable and healthcare providers should avoid harming either …show more content…
Professionally, I would follow the decision by the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which states that requiring a pregnant mother to have an ultrasound before choosing abortion is constitutional, although she does not have to look at the image (Pozgar, 2016, p. 85). The 1993 Utah Abortion Act Revision determined that a 24 hour waiting period does not impose an “undue burden” on the woman’s right to an abortion (Pozgar, 2016, p. 87). These decisions coincide with deontological ethics because they ensure that the patient is completely informed, and the healthcare provider tells the truth of risks and