re are radically differing opinions on the issue, that "one part of the abortion reality is the class of the two altruisms that appear to be utterly opposed" (Gentles, 1990; 19) but in essence share a common principle of individual freedom. Gentles contends that where the two sides differ is to whom the focus and claim to freedom is directed. He states, "the problem is which individual: a mother or child? Who is to be free and at what cost to the other?" (Gentles, 1990; 19). Those who support abortion, although they acknowledge the value of the 'potential human life', insist on the overriding importance of the woman's well-being and freedom of choice. Similarly those who reject abortion defend the concept of freedom claiming that the freedom of the baby to live is a human rights principle (Gentles, 1990; 22).
             In all areas of moral debate it is pertinent to evaluate the rights that are at issue. In the abortion controversy this involves an evaluation of what a woman's life is and how it is distinguished from a fetus' and whether the fetus in fact has rights to be taken into account (Gentles, 1990; 27). 'Pro-choice' supporters deny that the fetus has rights because it is only a 'potential human' and thus does not have moral personhood. 'Pro-lifers' argue for the right to protect a unique developing human life itself, not necessarily to protect 'potential human life'. They claim that "this developing life is already, from the moment of conception, unique and needs only time and nutrition to be fully developed" (Gentles, 1990; 26). Thus the 'pro-life' position revolves around one central tenet- that life begins at conception, or at least quite certainly before birth. Therefore killing for convenience is considered morally and legally wrong.
             Much of the controversy surrounding the abortion issue revolves around establishing ...