Ultrasound Viewers’ Attribution of Moral Status to Fetal Humans: A Case for Presumptive Rationality

• Authors: Giebel Heidi M.

Abstracts

EN

As several studies, along with a book and movie depicting the true story of a former clinic director, have recently brought to the public’s attention, fetal ultrasound images dramatically impact some viewers’ normative judgments: a small but non-negligible proportion of viewers attribute increased moral status to fetal humans and even form the belief that abortion is impermissible. I consider three types of psychological explanation for a viewer’s shift in beliefs: (1) increased bonding or empathy, (2) various forms of cognitive bias, and (3) type of cognitive processing involved. I consider the normative implications of each explanation, arguing that in each case the viewer’s judgment is presumptively rational.

Keywords

EN

ethics; psychology; cognition; abortion; judgment; bias

• Publisher: Instytut Filozofii - Uniwersytet Jagielloński
• Journal: Diametros
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 17
• Issue: 64
• Pages: 22-35

Dates

published

2020-06

Contributors

author

Giebel Heidi M.

References

• Amit E., Greene J. (2012), “You See, the Ends Don’t Justify the Means: Visual Imagery and Moral Judgment,” Psychological Science 23 (8): 861–868.
• Aristotle (1999), Nicomachean Ethics, trans. T. Irwin, Hackett, Indianapolis.
• Giebel H. (2020), Ethical Excellence: Philosophers, Psychologists, and Real-Life Exemplars Show Us How to Achieve It, CUA Press, Washington (DC).
• Batson C.D. (2009), “These Things Called Empathy: Eight Related but Distinct Phenomena,” [in:] Social Neuroscience. The Social Neuroscience of Empathy, J. Decety, W. Ickes (eds.), The MIT Press, Cambridge (MA): 3–15.
• Batson C.D. (2011), Altruism in Humans, Oxford University Press, New York.
• Black R.B. (1992), “Seeing the Baby: The Impact of Ultrasound Technology,” Journal of Genetic Counseling 1 (1): 45–54.
• Bloom P. (2016), Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion, HarperCollins, New York.
• Coke J.S., Batson C.D., McDavis K. (1978), “Empathic Mediation of Helping: A Two-Stage Model,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36 (7): 752–766.
• De Neys W. (ed.) (2017), Dual-Process Theory 2.0, Routledge, Oxon/New York.
• De Neys W., Pennycook G. (2019), “Logic, Fast and Slow: Advances in Dual-Process Theorizing,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 28 (5): 503–509.
• Draper J. (2002), “It Was a Real Good Show’: The Ultrasound Scan, Fathers, and the Power of Visual Knowledge,” Sociology of Health and Illness 24 (6): 771–795.
• Dykes K., Stjernqvist K. (2001), “The Importance of Ultrasound to First-Time Mothers’ Thoughts about Their Unborn Child,” Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology 19 (2): 95–104.
• Evans J.S.B.T., Stanovich K.E. (2013), “Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition: Advancing the Debate,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 8 (3): 223–241.
• Fletcher J.C., Evans M.I. (1983), “Maternal Bonding in Early Fetal Ultrasound Examinations,” New England Journal of Medicine 308: 392–393.
• Gatter M., Kimport K., Foster D.G. et al. (2014), “Relationship Between Ultrasound Viewing and Proceeding to Abortion,” Obstetrics and Gynecology 123 (1): 81–87.
• Gettier E. (1963), “Is Knowledge Justified True Belief?,” Analysis 23 (6): 121–123.
• Graziano W.G., Habashi M.M. (2015), “Searching for the Prosocial Personality,” [in:] The Oxford Handbook of Prosocial Behavior, D.A. Schroeder, W.G. Graziano (eds.), Oxford University Press, New York: 231–256.
• Haidt J. (2012), The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion, Vintage Books, New York.
• Hoffman M.L. (2002), Empathy and Moral Development: Implications for Caring and Justice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Hourdequin M. (2015), “The Limits of Empathy,” [in:] Virtue Ethics and Confucianism, S.C. Angle, M. Slote (eds.), Routledge, New York: 209–218.
• Hume D. (2011), A Treatise of Human Nature. Volume 1: Texts, D. Norton, M. Norton (eds.), [in:] D. Hume, Clarendon Hume Edition Series, Clarendon, Oxford.
• Johnson A. (2011), Unplanned: The Dramatic True Story of a Former Planned Parenthood Leader’s Eye-Opening Journey across the Life Line, Tyndale House, New York.
• de Jong-Pleij E.A.P., Ribbert L.S.M., Pistorius L.R. et al. (2013), “Three-Dimensional Ultrasound and Maternal Bonding, a Third Trimester Study and a Review,” Prenatal Diagnosis 33 (1): 81–88.
• Kahneman D. (2011), Thinking, Fast and Slow, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, New York.
• Mahajan N., Wynn K. (2012), “Origins of ‘Us’ versus ‘Them’: Prelinguistic Infants Prefer Similar Others,” Cognition 124 (2): 227–233.
• Marquis D. (2007), “The Moral-Principle Objection to Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research,” Metaphilosophy 38 (2–3): 190–206.
• Mencius [Mengzi] (2004), Mengzi, trans. B. Van Norden, Hackett, Indianapolis.
• Miller C. (2013), Moral Character: An Empirical Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Mills C. (2018), “Seeing, Feeling, Doing: Mandatory Ultrasound Laws, Empathy, and Abortion,” Journal of Practical Ethics 6 (2): 1–31.
• Milne L.S., Rich O.J. (1981), “Cognitive and Affective Aspects of the Responses of Pregnant Women to Sonography,” Maternal-Child Nursing Journal 10 (1): 15–39.
• Öhman S.G., Waldenström U. (2010), “Effect of First-Trimester Ultrasound Screening for Down Syndrome on Maternal–Fetal Attachment – A Randomized Controlled Trial,” Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare 1: 85–90.
• Øyen L., Aune I. (2016), “Viewing the Unborn Child – Pregnant Women’s Expectations, Attitudes, and Experiences Regarding Fetal Ultrasound Examination,” Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare 7: 8–13.
• Plato (1992), Republic, trans. B. Jowett, Hackett, Indianapolis.
• Ruffman T., Then R., Cheng C. et al. (2019), “Lifespan Differences in Emotional Contagion While Watching Emotion-Eliciting Videos,” PLoS ONE 14 (1): e0209253.
• Sanger C. (2008), “Seeing and Believing: Mandatory Ultrasound and the Path to a Protected Choice,” UCLA Law Review 56 (2): 351–408.
• Shaw L.L., Batson C.D., Todd R.M. (1994), “Empathy Avoidance: Forestalling Feeling for Another in Order to Escape the Motivational Consequences,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67 (5): 879–887.
• Slote M. (2007), The Ethics of Care and Empathy, Routledge, New York.
• South Dakota [USA] Legislature (2005), “Report of the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion,” URL = http://rewire.news/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/South-Dakota-Abortion-Task-Force-Report.pdf [Accessed 08.06.2020].
• Unger P. (2006), Living High and Letting Die: Our Illusion of Innocence, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Waldman K. (2014), “Does Looking at an Ultrasound Before Abortion Change Women’s Minds?,” Slate, URL = https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/01/ultrasound-viewing-before-an-abortion-a-new-study-finds-that-for-a-small-percentage-of-women-sonograms-change-minds.html [Accessed 08.06.2020].
• Wolf N. (1995), “Our Bodies, Our Souls: Rethinking Pro-Choice Rhetoric,” New Republic 213 (16): 26, 28–29, 32–35.

Identifiers

DOI

10.33392/diam.1472

ISSN

ISSN 1733-5566