The question of whether or not abortion is morally permissible is a complex and difficult one to answer, evoking much emotion on both sides of the debate. Many factors must be taken into consideration when rendering a verdict in a discussion on abortion. For instance, whose right to life is more prevalent a mothers, or the unborn child's'? Another such factor is the viability criterion, used to determine the personhood of the fetus. It is this factor that is the topic of Alan Zaitchik's essay entitled, Viability and the Morality of Abortion. In the essay, Zaitchik examines and rejects a particular reason that the viability criterion is often dismissed as morally arbitrary or a problem-ridden criterion for fetal personhood, namely that in the future medicine might be able to enable a zygote at the time of conception to be viable. He writes,
             "It is common for fetal "viability" to be dismissed out of hand as a morally arbitrary or problem-ridden criterion for fetal personhood. I want to examine and reject one particular reason often advanced in support of this claim, namely that future medical-technological progress is almost certain to someday render a fetus viable at the earliest stage of pregnancy, perhaps even at conception."
             He considers this objection to the viability criterion to be the "Objection," and all the other objections to be just "objections." Zaitchik successfully gives an argument as to why this theory of future medical technology dismissing the idea of viability should be rejected is:
             1. If no obvious problems, or perhaps no problems whatsoever follow from the mere fact that someday even a fertilized ovum may be viable then viability is a sound criterion for personhood.
             2. No obvious problems, or perhaps no problems whatsoever follow from the mere fact that someday even a fertilized ovum may be viable
             3. Thus, viability is a sound criterion for personhood.
             Thus, what he is arguing is that sinc...