Kayla is a raised as a Catholic Christian, so her moral theory is naturally, the natural law theory. This does not leave a whole lot of options for this pregnancy, other than actually giving birth. There are even a few reasons for why this is the case. First of all, one of the basic goods say that you are to preserve life, to protect it, to keep it safe. Which already means that life is a holy, divine, and sacred thing, that we have to protect and keep safe no matter what. This also correlates with killing being a violation of this theory. Additionally, one of the ten commandments, which is something Christians also follow, is thou shalt not kill. So, not only is life to be preserved but also, killing is forbidden, not only in natural law theory, but also in the very building blocks of her religion; the ten commandments. However, I do not see any sign of abortion being counted as murder in natural law theory, nor do am I not certain of the views in Christianity. But, if I were to guess, abortion would be considered killing. My next point supports my guess.
Reproduction, is another one of the basic goods, it is very encouraged. It essentially means that, you are to reproduce, as much as possible, the more the merrier. Which, in turn, means that the hindrance of reproduction is also a very serious infringement of the natural law theory. I believe that abortion very much falls under the category of hindering reproduction.
These are the main reasons to why abortion would not work, there are other options available however.
127 our experts are availableright now
So adoption, is it morally correct for Kayla to give it away for adoption? It does look like it is. There is really nothing anything against adopting or giving a child away for adoption, at least not in natural law theory, there might be in her religion as a whole, but not in the moral theory itself. As long as the child lives and is educated, I see nothing against adoption.
The last option available is giving birth, and raising it, which is the most encouraged option for Kayla.
Jared is not born and raised a Catholic Christian, he does not really follow any religion. He does, however, follow the virtual theory. Which means that if he wants to become a virtuous human, he has to follow a set of guidelines. Many of the guidelines contain being reasonable, and being able to evaluate the situation at hand. Because Kayla and Jared are both not emotionally ready and are also not financially ready. Jared would find it not very virtuous to have a child. Because for Jared and Kayla to be virtuous, they have to be able to acknowledge their abilities, and realize that their situation is not compatible with a child. So for Jared, an abortion would probably be the choice that would yield the best result, because of their situation.
An adoption would technically also work, if they would want to take that chance of leaving their child in someone else’s hands. The problem would still be that the pregnancy and birth of the child could be very costly, not only financially, but also for Kayla’s body. Then, not having the abortion and choosing to raise the child would be the worst case scenario for Jared: he would not be virtuous, neither would the couple as a whole.
So, if Kayla wants to be morally correct, she has to at least birth the child, and then they are able to choose if they want to give the child away for adoption or raise it themselves, with raising it themselves being the preferred encouraged option. For Jared to become virtuous and follow his moral theory, they have to abort the child. However, there is a chance that they could potentially give the child away for adoption. Raising it is not a choice for Jared.
Both have the small possibility of giving the child away for adoption. However, since there is a big chance that there is a conflict there too, either with their differences in moral theory, or the child ending up in a terrible spot, maybe with a terrible family, and since I am not helping Kayla and Jared to come to a compromise. If they were to ask me, and I would try to be as unbiased towards any one of them as possible, just to go of what I would do in their shoes. I would have to say an abortion is the right choice. Although it is Kayla’s body and it technically should be her choice. I do believe that being financially unstable is a very, very big part and it will reflect on to the child and affect it and its future poorly. If they do not have funds enough to care for this child, they will not be able to pay for any medical care. They might even be financially unstable enough that they cannot afford diapers, a crib, clothes, toys etc.
What might end up happening then is they focus less on studying, more on working, and in turn less on the child itself. They might even choose to take a big loan, just because they cannot care for the child with their income alone. Big debts turn in to even bigger debt and even bigger consequences when they are not being paid off fast enough. So, in conclusion, not getting an abortion might hurt and be cruel to the child. The parents will end up worse physically than they would have ended up mentally, because of the morals they follow. Sometimes the moral theories are not worth following, if it at the cost of the future of a child, who had no say in it, when it is the child that matters the most. Especially, when they can wait a couple of years and have, or even adopt, a child or more, when they are ready, emotionally and financially.
