Abstract
In his recent article Perry Hendricks presents what he calls the impairment argument
to show that abortion is immoral. To do so, he argues that to give a fetus fetal alcohol
syndrome is immoral. Because killing the fetus impairs it more than giving it fetal alcohol syndrome, Hendricks concludes that killing the fetus must also be immoral.
Here, I claim that killing a fetus does not impair it in the way that giving it fetal alcohol
syndrome does. By examining the reason why giving a fetus this condition is wrong, I
conclude that the same reasoning, on common pro‐choice accounts, does not apply
to killing the fetus. Accordingly, Hendricks's argument does not succeed in showing
abortion is immoral.