Study Sheet about Jewish Perspective on Abortion

When men fight and one of them pushes a pregnant woman and a miscarriage results, but no other damage ensues, the one responsible shall be fined according as the woman’s husband may exact from him, the payment to be based on reckoning. But if other damage ensues, the penalty shall be life for life…Ex. 21:22

2

The Jewish legal interpretation of this passage states specifically that only monetary compensation is necessary for one who causes the death of a fetus. The unborn fetus is not worthy of the “life for life” punishment demanded if the woman herself is killed. This clearly implies that the fetus is not accorded the same legal status as the woman herself, namely that of independent human being. (Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice)

Jewish legal principle that the fetus is to be regarded as part of the pregnant woman is contained in two examples from the Talmud. The first involves the sale of a cow which, subsequent to sale, is found to be pregnant. The legal determination is that the fetus in the womb of the cow belongs to the buyer, and that the seller can make no claim for further compensation. The second example concerns the conversion to Judaism of a woman who is pregnant. Jewish law regards the conversion valid for her future child as well, requiring no separate conversion for it after birth.

3

עברית

If a woman is in hard labor (that threatens her life), one dismembers the fetus within her and removes it limb by limb, because her life takes precedence over its life. Once the greater part of it emerges it may not be touched, for we do not set aside one life for another. (Mishna)

4

There are two principles employed here to arrive at the conclusion that the abortion is justified. The first and foremost of the two is that the fetus remains only a potential human life until its emergence from the birth canal. One must, therefore, sacrifice the potential life in order to save a fully existent human life, i.e., the pregnant woman in labor.

The second principle deals with the concept of self-defense. In Jewish law, one is permitted to defend oneself, even to the extent of taking the attacker’s life should one’s own life be in jeopardy. This point was brought into the discussion on abortion when some authorities in the Talmud challenged the prohibition stated above, of the taking of the life of its mother. It was argued that the principle of the aggressor ought to apply here. Since it was pursuing its mother with intent to kill, one should be permitted to kill the fetus if necessary, even the fetus whose greater portion had already emerged.

It is important to note that the Mishna text does not present either the pregnant woman or her physician with options. If her life is threatened, the unborn fetus must be sacrificed; she may not make the decision to sacrifice her own life for that of the fetus within. And, equally as compelling, once the child is born, no decision may be made to sacrifice its life in order to save that of its mother. They both have an equal claim on life.

5

עברית

In cases of non-therapeutic abortion, then, the major consideration is “the pain of the mother.” It is consideration for the woman involved, and not the fate of condition of the fetus, which becomes the determining factor in prohibiting or permitting an abortion. And it is precisely on this issue that diversity of opinion is now the greatest. Not only is the diversity seen among the various movements of Judaism today, but even within each movement itself. In addition to traditional Jewish mores and standards, each movement has its own criteria for determining the permissibility of abortion under other than therapeutic circumstances. (Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice)

6

All four non-Orthodox Jewish movements – Reform, Reconstructionist, Conservative and Humanist – are on record opposing any governmental regulation of abortion. Moreover, many Orthodox authorities take the same position. Whatever their opinions on abortion in any given situation, a vast majority of Jewish thinkers agree that decision-making with respect to abortion must be left in the hands of the woman involved, her husband, her physician, and her rabbi.

7

The guiding principles on abortion in Jewish tradition: a woman’s life, her pain, and her concerns take precedence over those of the fetus; existing life is always sacred and dates precedence over a potential life; and a woman has the personal freedom to apply the principles of her tradition unfettered by the legal imposition of moral standards other than her own.

8

עברית

"...debating the time of ensoulment– whether the soul enters the fetus at conception, at the end of the first trimester, at birth–was monumentally irrelevant. From the Jewish standpoint, “It is not when does the soul enter, it is what kind of a soul enters.”

Classic Christianity has always said that the soul which enters the fetus is tainted and must be cleansed by baptism to save it from eternal perdition. According to the doctrine of original sin, each individual soul inherits the taint of its primordial ancestors.

When St. Fulgentius in the sixth century was asked when that stain attaches to the person, he replied that it begins with conception. This resulted in concern that the fetus be brought to term so that it might be baptized. Without baptism the soul is condemned to death in both worlds, making abortion clearly worse than murder."

(“Jewish Views on Abortion,” from The Jewish Family and Jewish Continuity, edited by Steven Bayme and Gladys Rosen, published by KTAV.)

9

Judaism believes the soul given to us is pure. We do not worry about when ensoulment occurs since there is no proof one way or the other. Some declare that the soul of a newborn is not fully established for 30 days, hence there is no traditional burial of a still-born child or one that dies in early infancy. Some declare that ensoulment takes place upon birth. The bottom line is that ensoulment is considered a mystery that is

"one of the 'secrets of God' that will be revealed only when the Messiah comes." (Steven Bayme and Gladys Rosen