The issue of abortion and its' morality is no doubt one of great controversy. Is there any morally defensible point in a pregnancy where abortion is wrong afterwards but permissible before? In this paper I will argue that, yes, abortion is permissible but only to a certain extent.
             First we shall lay out the reasons why abortion is a needed procedure. Most prominently, accidents do happen. People become unintentionally pregnant at times when they may not be prepared to take care of a life or emotionally stable enough to give up their own child and have that child raised by a foreign family. Consider the physical imposition and burden of bearing a child; the morning sickness, the stress, the need for a complete change of lifestyle. After the nine months is up, the mother must then go through the immense pain of delivery (the issue of pain and morality will be discussed in further detail later on). Surely no one would consider it moral to force someone into parenting. It is neither morally right on the parents behalf nor the child's if you look at the welfare perspective.
             So, from the aforementioned arguments thus far, banning abortion completely would be an immoral action in it of itself. I do however recognize the need for a limit and based on relatively arbitrary factors, I choose four months to be appropriate.
             At four months old, the fetus has developed and distinguishable sex organs. Heart beat is detectable and the fetus can make spontaneous movements with its' recently formed arms and legs. The average sized fetus at this stage is a mere seven inches and weighs just five ounces. Any growth beyond this point is very rapid. This stage alone is clearly identifiable as a human fetus with an identifiable external anatomy. These details of the four month old fetus are not to serve as a basis of argument in any way. They are not given to persuade the reader that a four month old termination is any more moral than ...