Journal ofMedical Ethics 1997; 23: 19-25 J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/jme.23.1.19 on 1 February 1997. Downloaded from The case of Medea - a view of fetal-maternal conflict Matthew C Reid and Grant Gillett University of Otago Medical School, New Zealand Abstract Golden Fleece and flees her homeland. They settle Medea killed her children to take away the smilefrom in Corinth and have two children. However, Jason her husband's face, according to Euripides, an offence scorns and abandons Medea in order to marry (for against nature and morality. What ifMedea had still political motives) Glauce, the daughter of Creon, been canying her two children, perhaps due to give birth King of Corinth. Stateless and alone Medea wreaks within a week or so, and had done the same? If this a terrible revenge. To repay Jason for his betrayal would also have been morally reprehensible, would that and cold-hearted defection, the incensed Medea, be a judgment based on her motives or on her action? having made a pact with Aegeus, King of Athens for We argue that the act has multiple and holistic moral safe refuge, poisons Glauce, Jason's newly-wed wife, features and that, in fact, there is no absolute principle, and her father, Creon. Finally Medea kills her own such as the right ofthefetus to life, which governs our children crying, "I who gave them life will kill moraljudgments aboutfetal-maternal conflicts. We them".3 suggest that they illustrate a pervasive feature ofhuman Medea's act is shocking and violent. We can,copyright. moral discourse and can only be addressed by attending perhaps, imagine reasons which would mitigate her to a range ofnegotiable moral considerations which moral transgression; for instance she might have depend on particularfeatures ofeach situation. thought her children could share only shame and suffering as unwanted and embarrassing cast-offs of a powerful political figure. These do not seem to be Introduction part of Euripides's account, although her sense of The issue of "fetal-maternal conflicts"' is debated in dishonour and betrayal almost create sympathy for http://jme.bmj.com/ relation to both clinical practice and social or public her as a woman who has given everything to help policy. We will explore the debate about fetal- her husband. Despite this sympathy, the motive for maternal conflicts through a series of scenarios, the act and its intrinsic barbarity warrant our con- including the classical tale of Medea. We argue that demnation. Even if Medea is justified in her a focus on rights fails to capture the essential features outrage, the destruction of her children as an act of of the moral problem. We therefore suggest a wider revenge against Jason seems plainly to be wrong. focus that includes: the agent's reasons or motives Euripides himself recognises the injury to Medea, on September 25, 2021 by guest. Protected for relevant actions; the significance of the life of the yet his moral assessment of her is harsh. The chorus moral patient, and the rights of each of the moral sings: participants, We will argue that these three moral aspects of fetal-maternal conflicts should be held in a "O miserable mother, to destroy your own increase, reflective equilibrium2 and suggest how one might Murder the babes of your body! ... resolve situations of fetal-maternal conflict. What wickedness, what sorrow you have caused on the earth!"4 1) Medea In Jason's speeches, Medea is a polluter, a vile, Medea by Euripides raises issues that are as poignant savage, abhorrent child destroyer, an abomination, today as they were when the play was first performed possessed, and crazy. in 431 BC. If the case of Medea occurred today it would cer- Medea is a young princess who falls in love with tainly provoke widespread moral outrage and might the Greek hero, Jason, and because of that love be used to fuel the debate against the mother in cases betrays her own father, helps Jason to steal the of fetal-maternal conflict. However, other related scenarios are less clearcut and bring out other moral factors which make it harder to marry our intuitions Key words and clearly stated moral arguments and principles.5 Fetal-maternal conflict; abortion Consider three more fictional sketches. 20 The case ofMedea - a view offetal-maternal conflict J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/jme.23.1.19 on 1 February 1997. Downloaded from 2) Melissa 2 relishes it, and enjoys both the damage and the Melissa is thirty weeks pregnant with twins and is pain that will result. Even if both surgeons are abandoned by her partner, James, whom she has equally competent, surgeon 2 seems morally defi- supported for several years while he has studied law. cient solely because of the reasoning and reactions James leaves her to marry the daughter of a senior that accompany her act. partner in a major law firm. Melissa, like Medea, is In general, there are a range of reasons that are infuriated, and seeks revenge on James by ending her inherently vicious - cruelty, hatred, jealousy, vindic- pregnancy. tiveness, callousness, and greed all come to mind. There is also range of reasons that tend morally to commend an act - kindness, consideration, compas- 3) Nada sion, respect, patience, friendship, generosity, Nada, twenty-four weeks pregnant, has hyper- courage, and so on. That is not to say that any action tension-of-pregnancy (HOP) syndrome. This is a springing from these reasons is right, nor that only life-threatening condition in which the pregnant actions motivated in this way are right, but to woman's blood pressure rises to a dangerous level indicate a set of characteristically good reasons for with a high risk of brain haemorrhage or seizures. action. Any character who typically acts in this way is The only way to protect Nada from these risks is to likely to meet the demands of morality. abort the fetus. Nada is deeply upset but as there is Finally, there are acts which are morally neutral in no alternative a termination is arranged. respect of motives even if they are tragic in effect because they are accidental or there is no morally assessable choice made by the agent. Consider Baldr 4) Olga of Norse mythology, also known as Baldr the Good Olga is twenty-two weeks pregnant. She has been and Baldr the Beautiful. fairly ambivalent about the pregnancy but has not So widely loved was Baldr that Frigg his mother sought an abortion, nor shown any aversion towards obtained an oath "from fire and water, iron and all her fetus. However, she now begins to see the preg- kinds ofmetals, stones, earth, trees, ailments, beasts, nancy as too great a burden and would prefer not to birds, poison, and serpents that they would not harm copyright. continue with it any more. She has the attitude of: [him]".6 This rendered him invulnerable to all "I'd rather not bother". evidently harmful things. To amuse the other gods These four scenarios - Medea, Melissa, Nada and Baldr would stand up and let them throw things at Olga - provoke a range of moral judgments which him: "No matter what was done he was never hurt, embrace multiple conflicting considerations. We will and everyone thought that a fine thing". 6 try to outline an analysis of such conflicts resting on In this case the action of casting a stone, throwing three major features: a dart, or striking at Baldr was not vicious because http://jme.bmj.com/ his invulnerability to these things changed the sig- (i) the reason for the act; nificance of those actions in a way directly relevant (ii) the life of the moral patients; to the agents' intentions. (iii) the rights of the moral participants. However, if one of the gods had cast a burning fragment of lava at Baldr, believing that it would These are both holistic and interactive so that varia- harm him, that god would still have acted viciously tions in one affect the moral significance of the despite the act being harmless. In the story the on September 25, 2021 by guest. Protected others. opposite happened: an evil god, Loki, found out that Frigg had not exacted the oath from the mistletoe bush. Loki took a dart of mistletoe to Baldr's blind Actions: reasons, lives, and rights brother Hoder. 1) REASON FOR ACTION Loki asked him: "Why aren't you throwing darts The reasons for an action are one of its principal at Baldr?" [Hoder] replied: "Because I can't see morally relevant features. Imagine that I am round- where Baldr is, and, another thing, I have no ing a corner in my car, on a busy road, and I hit a weapon." Then Loki said: "You go and do as the person who is crossing at the intersection. In world others are doing and show Baldr honour like other 1, I want to injure him because he made me look men. I will show you where he is standing: throw this foolish in front of some friends. In world 2, I hit him twig at him." [Hoder] took the mistletoe and aimed because I could not see him behind a parked truck. at Baldr as directed by Loki. The dart went right Now, even though I have done the same thing in through him and he fell dead to the ground. 7 world 1 and world 2, and the results are identical, Hoder cast the twig believing that Baldr was there is considerable moral difference between the invulnerable to it but was blameless due to the two.