It is, after all, the mother's body that is affected by the pregnancy, and it is her emotional and social life that will be drastically altered for at least the next nine months and beyond. .
.
Besides biased religious perspectives, the best ethical viewpoint on abortion would probably be through the description and evaluation of the two most known theoretical approaches: those of Kant's and of Utilitarianism (Act and Rule). .
Beginning with the approach of Utilitarianism, it must be acknowledged that Utilitarianism basically deals with pleasure and with pain. Thus someone should be concerned with the amounts of pleasure and pain in situations where abortion is permitted, when compared to the amounts of pleasure and pain where abortion is forbidden. It should also be noted that the main consideration would be the interest of the fetus: not only can its future life be potentially happy (given that there is more happiness than suffering) it might also be the fact that the abortion itself is painful, especially if it occurs later in the pregnancy.
On the other hand, this focus on the fetus is not guaranteed since any suffering involved in the abortion can be avoided by doing the procedure sooner (before the fetus has even developed the capability of suffering), or with modern painless techniques. So as a result, the direct suffering of the fetus cannot be an argument against abortion, only the bad practice of it. A more significant consideration exists if the future life of the fetus. Will it involve a probable balance of happiness over suffering? This would seem to be a definite argument against abortion, although not a prevailing one. .
After the fetus, the second party who should strongly be considered are the parents and other family members, or guardians if the alternative to a abortion is adoption. According to some studies, having a baby results in a decrease of the happiness in a relationship - even in the cases where the pregnancy was desired.
