sohimoОмский научный вестник. Серия "Общество. История. Современность"Omsk Scientific Bulletin. Series Society. History. Modernity2542-04882541-7983Омский государственный технический университет10.25206/2542-0488-2024-9-2-120-131YSEOFYsohimo-106Research ArticleФИЛОСОФИЯ. Аргументы и предикаментыPILOSOPHY. Arguments and predicatesАборты: аргументы pro et contra = S. Holm, J. Lewis. Abortion: pro et contraAbortion: pro et contraХольмC.HolmS.

Осло; Великобритания; Манчестер

Oslo; United Kingdom; Manchester

ЛьюисДж.LewisJ.

Манчестер

Manchester

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1358-743XНехаевА. В.NekhaevA. V.

Андрей Викторович Нехаев, переводчик с английского языка, доктор философских наук, доцент (Россия), профессор, профессор кафедры, научный сотрудник

кафедра «История, философия и социальные коммуникации»; кафедра «Философия»; Лаборатория логико-философских исследований

Омск; Тюмень; Томск

Источник перевода: Holm S., Lewis J. Abortion // Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy / Eds.: M. Sellers, S. Kirste. Dordrecht: Springer, 2023. P. 1–8. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-6730-0_1049-1.

Ссылка на полный текст статьи: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369659180_Abortion

AuthorID (РИНЦ): 394939; AuthorID (SCOPUS): 57211853279; ResearcherID: M-7208-2016

Andrei Viktorovich Nekhaev, translator from English, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Associate Professor, Professor, Professor of Department, Research Associate

History, Philosophy and Social Communications Department; Philosophy Department; Laboratory of Logical and Philosophical Studies

Omsk; Tyumen; Tomsk

AuthorID (RSCI)): 394939; AuthorID (SCOPUS): 57211853279; ResearcherID: M-7208-2016

avnehaev@omgtu.ruУниверситет Осло; Манчестерский университетUniversity of Oslo; The University of ManchesterМанчестерский университетThe University of ManchesterОмский государственный технический университет; Тюменский государственный университет; Томский научный центр СО РАНOmsk State Technical University; Tyumen State University; Tomsk Scientific Center, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences20243006202492120131Copyright © Хольм C., Льюис Д., Нехаев А.В., 20242024Хольм C., Льюис Д., Нехаев А.В.Holm S., Lewis J., Nekhaev A.V.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://ois.omgtu.ru/jour/article/view/106

   В статье содержится критический обзор ряда наиболее распространенных аргументов, активно применяемых в дебатах по проблеме абортов. На основе понятия моральной личности выделяются и характеризуются основные группы таких аргументов (отсутствия полного морального статуса, полного морального статуса и градуализм). Отдельно рассматриваются вопросы о праве беременных женщин на аборт, юридической защите права плода на жизнь, а также практике использования медицинской концепции жизнеспособности в законодательстве.

   The article provides a critical review of some of the most common arguments actively used in the abortion debate. Based on the notion of moral personhood, the main groups of such arguments (no full moral status, full moral status, and gradualism) are identified and characterized. Separate consideration is given to the right of pregnant women to abortion, the legal defense of the fetus’ right to life, and the practice of using the medical concept of viability in law.

искусственный абортаргументы морального статусазаконы об абортахправа беременных женщинжизнеспособность плодаinduced abortionmoral status argumentsabortion lawsrights of pregnant womenfetal viabilityReferencesSulmasy D. P. Emergency Contraception for Women Who Have Been Raped: Must Catholics Test for Ovulation, or Is Testing for Pregnancy Morally Sufficient? // Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. 2006. Vol. 16, № 4. P. 305–331. DOI: 10.1353/ken.2006.0026.Sulmasy D. P. Emergency Contraception for Women Who Have Been Raped: Must Catholics Test for Ovulation, or Is Testing for Pregnancy Morally Sufficient? // Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. 2006. Vol. 16, no. 4. P. 305–331. DOI: 10.1353/ken.2006.0026. (In Engl.).Purdy L. Is Emergency Contraception Murder? // Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2009. Vol. 18. P. 37–42. DOI: 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60114-9.Purdy L. Is Emergency Contraception Murder? // Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2009. Vol. 18. P. 37–42. DOI: 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60114-9. (In Engl.).Sheldon S. The Regulatory Cliff Edge Between Contraception and Abortion: The Legal and Moral Significance of Implantation // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2015. Vol. 41, № 9. P. 762–765. DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102712.Sheldon S. The Regulatory Cliff Edge Between Contraception and Abortion: The Legal and Moral Significance of Implantation // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2015. Vol. 41, no. 9. P. 762–765. DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102712. (In Engl.).Hall A. Selective Reduction of Pregnancy: A Legal Analysis // Journal of Medical Ethics. 1996. Vol. 22, № 5. P. 304–308. DOI: 10.1136/jme.22.5.304.Hall A. Selective Reduction of Pregnancy: A Legal Analysis // Journal of Medical Ethics. 1996. Vol. 22, no. 5. P. 304–308. DOI: 10.1136/jme.22.5.304. (In Engl.).McClimans L. Elective Twin Reductions: Evidence and Ethics // Bioethics. 2010. Vol. 24, № 6. P. 295–303. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.01704.x.McClimans L. Elective Twin Reductions: Evidence and Ethics // Bioethics. 2010. Vol. 24, no. 6. P. 295–303. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.01704.x. (In Engl.).Rao R. Selective Reduction: ‘A Soft Cover for Hard Choices’ or Another Name for Abortion? // Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 2015. Vol. 43, № 2. P. 196–205. DOI: 10.1111/jlme.12233.Rao R. Selective Reduction: ‘A Soft Cover for Hard Choices’ or Another Name for Abortion? // Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 2015. Vol. 43, no. 2. P. 196–205. DOI: 10.1111/jlme.12233. (In Engl.).Jackson E. Regulating Reproduction: Law, Technology and Autonomy. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001. 368 p.Jackson E. Regulating Reproduction: Law, Technology and Autonomy. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001. 368 p. (In Engl.).Cook R. J, Dickens B. M, Fathalla M. F. Reproductive Health and Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. 584 p.Cook R. J, Dickens B. M, Fathalla M. F. Reproductive Health and Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. 584 p. (In Engl.).Abortion Care Guideline. World Health Organization, Geneva, 2022. URL: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240039483 (дата обращения: 14. 12. 2023).Abortion Care Guideline. World Health Organization, Geneva, 2022. URL: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240039483 (accessed: 14. 12. 2023). (In Engl.).Romanis E. C. Abortion Access and the Benefits and Limitations of Abortion-Permissive Legal Frameworks: Lessons from the United Kingdom // Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 2023. Vol. 32, № 3. P. 378–390. DOI: 10.1017/S096318012200086X.Romanis E. C. Abortion Access and the Benefits and Limitations of Abortion-Permissive Legal Frameworks: Lessons from the United Kingdom // Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 2023. Vol. 32, no. 3. P. 378–390. DOI: 10.1017/S096318012200086X. (In Engl.).Scott R. Interpreting the Disability Ground of the Abortion Act // The Cambridge Law Journal. 2005. Vol. 64, № 2. P. 388–412. DOI: 10.1017/S0008197305006902.Scott R. Interpreting the Disability Ground of the Abortion Act // The Cambridge Law Journal. 2005. Vol. 64, no. 2. P. 388–412. DOI: 10.1017/S0008197305006902. (In Engl.).Holm S. The Expressivist Objection to Prenatal Diagnosis: Can It Be Laid to Rest? // 2008. Vol. 34, № 1. P. 24–25. DOI: 10.1136/jme.2006.019984.Holm S. The Expressivist Objection to Prenatal Diagnosis: Can It Be Laid to Rest? // 2008. Vol. 34, no. 1. P. 24–25. DOI: 10.1136/jme.2006.019984. (In Engl.).McGuinness S. Law, Reproduction, and Disability: Fatally ‘Handicapped’? // Medical Law Review. 2013. Vol. 21, № 2. P. 213–242. DOI: 10.1093/medlaw/fws041.McGuinness S. Law, Reproduction, and Disability: Fatally ‘Handicapped’? // Medical Law Review. 2013. Vol. 21, no. 2. P. 213–242. DOI: 10.1093/medlaw/fws041. (In Engl.).Caplan A. L., Wilson J. M. The Ethical Challenges of in Utero Gene Therapy // Nature Genetics. 2000. Vol. 24, № 2. P. 107. DOI: 10.1038/72747.Caplan A. L., Wilson J. M. The Ethical Challenges of in Utero Gene Therapy // Nature Genetics. 2000. Vol. 24, no. 2. P. 107. DOI: 10.1038/72747. (In Engl.).Savulescu J. Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best Children // Bioethics. 2001. Vol. 15, № 5/6. P. 413–426. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8519.00251.Savulescu J. Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best Children // Bioethics. 2001. Vol. 15, no. 5/6. P. 413–426. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8519.0251. (In Engl.).Cameron C., Williamson R. Is There an Ethical Difference Between Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Abortion? // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2003. Vol. 29, № 2. P. 90–92. DOI: 10.1136/jme.29.2.90.Cameron C., Williamson R. Is There an Ethical Difference Between Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Abortion? // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2003. Vol. 29, no. 2. P. 90–92. DOI: 10.1136/jme.29.2.90. (In Engl.).Steinbock B. Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Embryo Selection // A Companion to Genethics / Eds.: J. Burley, J. Harris. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004. P. 175–190.Steinbock B. Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Embryo Selection // A Companion to Genethics / Eds.: J. Burley, J. Harris. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004. P. 175–190. (In Engl.).Baker L. R. Persons and Bodies: A Constitution View. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 233 p.Baker L. R. Persons and Bodies: A Constitution View. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 233 p. (In Engl.).Chisholm R. M. Person and Object: A Metaphysical Study. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1976. 230 p.Chisholm R. M. Person and Object: A Metaphysical Study. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1976. 230 p. (In Engl.).Wiggins D. Sameness and Substance. Oxford Blackwell, 1980. 238 p.Wiggins D. Sameness and Substance. Oxford Blackwell, 1980. 238 p. (In Engl.).Shoemaker D. Personal Identity and Ethics // The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy / Ed. E. N. Zalta. URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-ethics/ (дата обращения: 14. 12. 2023).Shoemaker D. Personal Identity and Ethics // The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy / Ed. E. N. Zalta. URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-ethics/ (accessed: 14. 12. 2023). (In Engl.).Warren M. A. On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion // Monist. 1973. Vol. 57, № 1. P. 43–61. DOI: 10.5840/monist197357133.Warren M. A. On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion // Monist. 1973. Vol. 57, no. 1. P. 43–61. DOI: 10.5840/monist197357133. (In Engl.).English J. Abortion and the Concept of a Person // Canadian Journal of Philosophy. 1975. Vol. 5, № 2. P. 233–243. DOI: 10.1080/00455091.1975.10716109.English J. Abortion and the Concept of a Person // Canadian Journal of Philosophy. 1975. Vol. 5, no. 2. P. 233–243. DOI: 10.1080/00455091.1975.10716109. (In Engl.).Glover J. Causing Death and Saving Lives: The Moral Problems of Abortion, Infanticide, Suicide, Euthanasia, Capital Punishment, War and Other Life-or-Death Choices. London: Pelican Books, 1977. 336 p.Glover J. Causing Death and Saving Lives: The Moral Problems of Abortion, Infanticide, Suicide, Euthanasia, Capital Punishment, War and Other Life-or-Death Choices. London: Pelican Books, 1977. 336 p. (In Engl.).Singer P. Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals. New York: Harper Collins, 1975. 301 p.Singer P. Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals. New York: Harper Collins, 1975. 301 p. (In Engl.).Raz J. On the Nature of Rights // Mind. 1984. Vol. 93, № 370. P. 194–214. DOI: 10.1093/mind/XCIII.370.194.Raz J. On the Nature of Rights // Mind. 1984. Vol. 93, no. 370. P. 194–214. DOI: 10.1093/mind/XCIII.370.194. (In Engl.).Raz J. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. 435 p.Raz J. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. 435 p. (In Engl.).Kramer M. H. Rights without Trimmings // A Debate over Rights: Philosophical Enquiries / Eds.: M. H. Kramer, N. E. Simmonds, H. Steiner. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. P. 7–111.Kramer M. H. Rights without Trimmings // A Debate over Rights: Philosophical Enquiries / Eds.: M. H. Kramer, N. E. Simmonds, H. Steiner. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. P. 7–111. (In Engl.).Kramer M. H. Getting Rights Right // Rights, Wrongs and Responsibilities / Ed. M. H. Kramer. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001. P. 28–95.Kramer M. H. Getting Rights Right // Rights, Wrongs and Responsibilities / Ed. M. H. Kramer. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001. P. 28–95. (In Engl.).Kramer M. H. Some Doubts about Alternatives to the Interest Theory of Rights // Ethics. 2013. Vol. 123, № 2. P. 245–263. DOI: 10.1086/668705.Kramer M. H. Some Doubts about Alternatives to the Interest Theory of Rights // Ethics. 2013. Vol. 123, no. 2. P. 245–263. DOI: 10.1086/668705. (In Engl.).Tooley M. Abortion and Infanticide // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1972. Vol. 2, № 1. P. 37–65.Tooley M. Abortion and Infanticide // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1972. Vol. 2, no. 1. P. 37–65. (In Engl.).Tooley M. Abortion and Infanticide. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983. 441 p.Tooley M. Abortion and Infanticide. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983. 441 p. (In Engl.).Engelhardt H. T. The Foundations of Bioethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. 446 p.Engelhardt H. T. The Foundations of Bioethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. 446 p. (In Engl.).Harris J. The Value of Life: An Introduction to Medical Ethics. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985. 300 p.Harris J. The Value of Life: An Introduction to Medical Ethics. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985. 300 p. (In Engl.).McMahan J. The Ethics of Killing: Problems at the Margins of Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 540 p.McMahan J. The Ethics of Killing: Problems at the Margins of Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 540 p. (In Engl.).Singer P. Practical Ethics. Cambridg: Cambridge University Press, 1993. 395 p.Singer P. Practical Ethics. Cambridg: Cambridge University Press, 1993. 395 p. (In Engl.).Buss S. The Value of Humanity // The Journal of Philosophy. 2012. Vol. 109, № 5/6. P. 341–377. DOI: 10.5840/jphil20121095/614.Buss S. The Value of Humanity // The Journal of Philosophy. 2012. Vol. 109, no. 5/6. P. 341–377. DOI: 10.5840/jphil20121095/614. (In Engl.).Feinberg J., Levenbook B. B. Abortion // Matters of Life and Death: New Introductory Essays in Moral Philosophy / Ed. T. Regan. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1993. P. 183–234.Feinberg J., Levenbook B. B. Abortion // Matters of Life and Death: New Introductory Essays in Moral Philosophy / Ed. T. Regan. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1993. P. 183–234. (In Engl.).Clinkenbeard W. W. On the Trail of the Holy Humanhood // Journal of Medical Ethics. 1989. Vol. 15, № 2. P. 90–91. DOI: 10.1136/jme.15.2.90.Clinkenbeard W. W. On the Trail of the Holy Humanhood // Journal of Medical Ethics. 1989. Vol. 15, no. 2. P. 90–91. DOI: 10.1136/jme.15.2.90. (In Engl.).Kuhse H., Singer P. Should the Baby Live? The Problem of Handicapped Infants. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985. 228 p.Kuhse H., Singer P. Should the Baby Live? The Problem of Handicapped Infants. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985. 228 p. (In Engl.).Warren M. A. The Moral Significance of Birth // Hypatia. 1989. Vol. 4, № 3. P. 46–65. DOI: 10.1111/j.1527-2001.1989.tb00591.x.Warren M. A. The Moral Significance of Birth // Hypatia. 1989. Vol. 4, no. 3. P. 46–65. DOI: 10.1111/j.1527-2001.1989.tb00591.x. (In Engl.).Langerak E. A. Abortion: Listening to the Middle // The Hastings Center Report. 1979. Vol. 9, № 5. P. 24–28. DOI: 10.2307/3561517.Langerak E. A. Abortion: Listening to the Middle // The Hastings Center Report. 1979. Vol. 9, no. 5. P. 24–28. DOI: 10.2307/3561517. (In Engl.).Greasley K. Arguments about Abortion: Personhood, Morality, and the Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. 269 p.Greasley K. Arguments about Abortion: Personhood, Morality, and the Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. 269 p. (In Engl.).Rodger D., Blackshaw B. P., Miller C. Beyond Infanticide: How Psychological Accounts of Persons Can Justify Harming Infants // The New Bioethics. 2018. Vol. 24, № 2. P. 106–121. DOI: 10.1080/20502877.2018.1438771.Rodger D., Blackshaw B. P., Miller C. Beyond Infanticide: How Psychological Accounts of Persons Can Justify Harming Infants // The New Bioethics. 2018. Vol. 24, no. 2. P. 106–121. DOI: 10.1080/20502877.2018.1438771. (In Engl.).Lagercrantz H., Changeux J.-P. The Emergence of Human Consciousness: From Fetal to Neonatal Life // Pediatric Research. 2009. Vol. 65, № 3. P. 255–260. DOI: 10.1203/PDR.0b013e3181973b0d.Lagercrantz H., Changeux J.-P. The Emergence of Human Consciousness: From Fetal to Neonatal Life // Pediatric Research. 2009. Vol. 65, no. 3. P. 255–260. DOI: 10.1203/PDR.0b013e3181973b0d. (In Engl.).Kluge E.-H. W. The Right to Life of Potential Persons // Dalhousie Law Journal. 1977. Vol. 3, № 3. P. 837–848.Kluge E.-H. W. The Right to Life of Potential Persons // Dalhousie Law Journal. 1977. Vol. 3, no. 3. P. 837–848. (In Engl.).Himma K. E. A Dualist Analysis of Abortion: Personhood and the Concept of Self Qua Experiential Subject // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2005. Vol. 31, № 1. P. 48–55. DOI: 10.1136/jme.2002.000828.Himma K. E. A Dualist Analysis of Abortion: Personhood and the Concept of Self Qua Experiential Subject // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2005. Vol. 31, no. 1. P. 48–55. DOI: 10.1136/jme.2002.000828. (In Engl.).Dunstan G. R. The Moral Status of the Human Embryo: A Tradition Recalled // Journal of Medical Ethics. 1984. Vol. 10, № 1. P. 38–44. DOI: 10.1136/jme.10.1.38.Dunstan G. R. The Moral Status of the Human Embryo: A Tradition Recalled // Journal of Medical Ethics. 1984. Vol. 10, no. 1. P. 38–44. DOI: 10.1136/jme.10.1.38. (In Engl.).Aksoy S. The Beginning of Human Life and Embryos: A Philosophical and Theological Perspective // Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2007. Vol. 14. P. 86–91. DOI: 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60736-5.Aksoy S. The Beginning of Human Life and Embryos: A Philosophical and Theological Perspective // Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2007. Vol. 14. P. 86–91. DOI: 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60736-5. (In Engl.).Morgan L. M. The Potentiality Principle from Aristotle to Abortion // Current Anthropology. 2013. Vol. 54, № S7. P. S15–S25. DOI: 10.1086/670804.Morgan L. M. The Potentiality Principle from Aristotle to Abortion // Current Anthropology. 2013. Vol. 54, no. S7. P. S15–S25. DOI: 10.1086/670804. (In Engl.).Gуmez-Lobo A. Inviolability at Any Age // Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. 2007. Vol. 17, № 4. P. 311–320. DOI: 10.1353/ken.2008.0008.Gуmez-Lobo A. Inviolability at Any Age // Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. 2007. Vol. 17, no. 4. P. 311–320. DOI: 10.1353/ken.2008.0008. (In Engl.).Persons, Moral Worth, and Embryos: A Critical Analysis of Pro-Choice Arguments / Ed. S. Napier. Dordrecht: Springer, 2011. 283 p.Persons, Moral Worth, and Embryos: A Critical Analysis of Pro-Choice Arguments / Ed. S. Napier. Dordrecht: Springer, 2011. 283 p. (In Engl.).Donceel J. F. Immediate Animation and Delayed Hominization // Theological Studies. 1970. Vol. 31, № 1. P. 76–105. DOI: 10.1177/004056397003100103.Donceel J. F. Immediate Animation and Delayed Hominization // Theological Studies. 1970. Vol. 31, no. 1. P. 76–105. DOI: 10.1177/004056397003100103. (In Engl.).Eberl J. T. The Beginning of Personhood: A Thomistic Biological Analysis // Bioethics. 2000. Vol. 14, № 2. P. 134–157. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8519.00186.Eberl J. T. The Beginning of Personhood: A Thomistic Biological Analysis // Bioethics. 2000. Vol. 14, no. 2. P. 134–157. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8519.00186. (In Engl.).Meyer J. R. Embryonic Personhood, Human Nature, and Rational Ensoulment // The Heythrop Journal. 2006. Vol. 47, № 2. P. 206–225. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2265.2006.00285.x.Meyer J. R. Embryonic Personhood, Human Nature, and Rational Ensoulment // The Heythrop Journal. 2006. Vol. 47, no. 2. P. 206–225. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2265.2006.00285.x. (In Engl.).Al-Bukhari Imam M. Sahih Al-Bukhari (Hadith). In 9 vols. Beirut: Dar Al Maarifah, 1995. Vol. 3. 238 p.Al-Bukhari Imam M. Sahih Al-Bukhari (Hadith). In 9 vols. Beirut: Dar Al Maarifah, 1995. Vol. 3. 238 p. (In Arab.).Albar M. Human Development as Revealed in the Qur’an and Hadith: The Creation of Man Between Medicine and the Quran. Jeddah: Saudi Publishing House, 1996. 149 p.Albar M. Human Development as Revealed in the Qur’an and Hadith: The Creation of Man Between Medicine and the Quran. Jeddah: Saudi Publishing House, 1996. 149 p. (In Engl.).Khitamy B. A. Divergent Views on Abortion and the Period of Ensoulment // Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal. 2013. Vol. 13, № 1. P. 26–31. DOI: 10.12816/0003192.Khitamy B. A. Divergent Views on Abortion and the Period of Ensoulment // Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal. 2013. Vol. 13, no. 1. P. 26–31. DOI: 10.12816/0003192. (In Engl.).Rosner F. Modern Medicine and Jewish Ethics. New York: Yeshiva University Press, 1986. 405 p.Rosner F. Modern Medicine and Jewish Ethics. New York: Yeshiva University Press, 1986. 405 p. (In Engl.).Jakobovits I. The Status of the Embryo in the Jewish Tradition // The Status of the Human Embryo: Perspectives from Moral Traditions / Eds.: G. R. Dunstan, M. J. Seller. London: King’s Fund Publishing, 1988. P. 62–73.Jakobovits I. The Status of the Embryo in the Jewish Tradition // The Status of the Human Embryo: Perspectives from Moral Traditions / Eds.: G. R. Dunstan, M. J. Seller. London: King’s Fund Publishing, 1988. P. 62–73. (In Engl.).Marquis D. Why Abortion Is Immoral // The Journal of Philosophy. 1989. Vol. 86, № 4. P. 183–202. DOI: 10.2307/2026961.Marquis D. Why Abortion Is Immoral // The Journal of Philosophy. 1989. Vol. 86, no. 4. P. 183–202. DOI: 10.2307/2026961.(In Engl.).Marquis D. Deprivations, Futures and the Wrongness of Killing // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2001. Vol. 27, № 6. P. 363–369. DOI: 10.1136/jme.27.6.363.Marquis D. Deprivations, Futures and the Wrongness of Killing // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2001. Vol. 27, no. 6. P. 363–369. DOI: 10.1136/jme.27.6.363. (In Engl.).Marquis D. Brill’s Objections to the Future of Value Argument // Social Theory and Practice. 2005. Vol. 31, № 1. P. 105–114. DOI: 10.5840/soctheorpract20053115.Marquis D. Brill’s Objections to the Future of Value Argument // Social Theory and Practice. 2005. Vol. 31, no. 1. P. 105–114. DOI: 10.5840/soctheorpract20053115. (In Engl.).Marquis D. Why Abortion is Seriously Wrong: Two Views // Bioethics with Liberty and Justice: Themes in the Work of Joseph M. Boyle / Ed. C. Tollefsen. Dordrecht: Springer, 2011. P. 3–22.Marquis D. Why Abortion is Seriously Wrong: Two Views // Bioethics with Liberty and Justice: Themes in the Work of Joseph M. Boyle / Ed. C. Tollefsen. Dordrecht: Springer, 2011. P. 3–22. (In Engl.).Strong C. A Critique of ‘the Best Secular Argument Against Abortion’ // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2008. Vol. 34, № 10. P. 727–731. DOI: 10.1136/jme.2008.024646.Strong C. A Critique of ‘the Best Secular Argument Against Abortion’ // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2008. Vol. 34, no. 10. P. 727–731. DOI: 10.1136/jme.2008.024646. (In Engl.).Stone J. Why Potentiality Matters // Canadian Journal of Philosophy. 1987. Vol. 17, № 4. P. 815–829. DOI: 10.1080/00455091.1987.10715920.Stone J. Why Potentiality Matters // Canadian Journal of Philosophy. 1987. Vol. 17, no. 4. P. 815–829. DOI: 10.1080/00455091.1987.10715920. (In Engl.).Hare R. M. Abortion and the Golden Rule // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1975. Vol. 4, № 3 P. 201–222.Hare R. M. Abortion and the Golden Rule // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1975. Vol. 4, no. 3 P. 201–222. (In Engl.).Persson I. Inclusive Ethics: Extending Beneficence and Egalitarian Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. 272 p.Persson I. Inclusive Ethics: Extending Beneficence and Egalitarian Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. 272 p. (In Engl.).Persson I. Harming the Non-Conscious // Bioethics. 1999. Vol. 13, № 3/4. P. 294–305. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8519.00158.Persson I. Harming the Non-Conscious // Bioethics. 1999. Vol. 13, no. 3/4. P. 294–305. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8519.00158. (In Engl.).Warren M. A. Do Potential People Have Moral Rights? // Canadian Journal of Philosophy. 1977. Vol. 7, № 2. P. 275–289. DOI: 10.1080/00455091.1977.10717018.Warren M. A. Do Potential People Have Moral Rights? // Canadian Journal of Philosophy. 1977. Vol. 7, no. 2. P. 275–289. DOI: 10.1080/00455091.1977.10717018. (In Engl.).Holm S. The Moral Status of the Pre-Personal Human Being: The Argument from Potential Reconsidered // Conceiving the Embryo / Eds.: D. Evans, N. Pickering. Dordrecht: Klьwer, 1996. P. 193–220.Holm S. The Moral Status of the Pre-Personal Human Being: The Argument from Potential Reconsidered // Conceiving the Embryo / Eds.: D. Evans, N. Pickering. Dordrecht: Klüwer, 1996. P. 193–220. (In Engl.).Burgess J. A. Potential and Foetal Value // Journal of Applied Philosophy. 2010. Vol. 27, № 2. P. 140–153. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5930.2010.00482.x.Burgess J. A. Potential and Foetal Value // Journal of Applied Philosophy. 2010. Vol. 27, no. 2. P. 140–153. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5930.2010.00482.x. (In Engl.).Engelhardt H. T. The Ontology of Abortion // Ethics. 1974. Vol. 84, № 3. P. 217–234. DOI: 10.1086/291919.Engelhardt H. T. The Ontology of Abortion // Ethics. 1974. Vol. 84, no. 3. P. 217–234. DOI: 10.1086/291919. (In Engl.).Sumner L. W. A Third Way // The Problem of Abortion / Eds.: J. Feinberg, S. Dwyer. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing, 1997. P. 98–117.Sumner L. W. A Third Way // The Problem of Abortion / Eds.: J. Feinberg, S. Dwyer. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing, 1997. P. 98–117. (In Engl.).Little M. O. Abortion and the Margins of Personhood // Rutgers Law Journal. 2008. Vol. 39. P. 331–348.Little M. O. Abortion and the Margins of Personhood // Rutgers Law Journal. 2008. Vol. 39. P. 331–348. (In Engl.).Warren M. A. Moral Status: Obligations to Persons and Other Living Things. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. 265 p.Warren M. A. Moral Status: Obligations to Persons and Other Living Things. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. 265 p. (In Engl.).Global Abortion Policies Database. World Health Organization, Geneva, 2022. URL: https://abortion-policies.srhr.org/ (дата обращения: 14. 12. 2023).Global Abortion Policies Database. World Health Organization, Geneva, 2022. URL: https://abortion-policies.srhr.org/ (accessed: 14. 12. 2023). (In Engl.).The World’s Abortion Laws. Center for Reproductive Rights, New York, 2022. URL: https://reproductiverights.org/our-issues/abortion/ (дата обращения: 14. 12. 2023).The World’s Abortion Laws. Center for Reproductive Rights, New York, 2022. URL: https://reproductiverights.org/our-issues/abortion/ (accessed: 14. 12. 2023). (In Engl.).Romanis E. C. Is ‘Viability’ Viable? Abortion, Conceptual Confusion and the Law in England and Wales and the United States // Journal of Law and the Biosciences. 2020. Vol. 7, № 1. P. 1–29. DOI: 10.1093/jlb/lsaa059.Romanis E. C. Is ‘Viability’ Viable? Abortion, Conceptual Confusion and the Law in England and Wales and the United States // Journal of Law and the Biosciences. 2020. Vol. 7, no. 1. P. 1–29. DOI: 10.1093/jlb/lsaa059. (In Engl.).Jackson E. Abortion, Autonomy and Prenatal Diagnosis // Social & Legal Studies. 2000. Vol. 9, № 4. P. 467–494. DOI: 10.1177/096466390000900401.Jackson E. Abortion, Autonomy and Prenatal Diagnosis // Social & Legal Studies. 2000. Vol. 9, no. 4. P. 467–494. DOI: 10.1177/096466390000900401. (In Engl.).

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.