VOF Main Assignment - Final Draft Essay

Tamura 1

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Outline

Thesis statement: Japan should take action on historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea because the lack of knowledge of what Japan has done since the Second World War ended is used for stirring anti-Japanese feeling and this feeling will be a wall of cooperation with Japan.

Ⅰ. Introduction
　　A. Backgroud information
　　B. Thesis statement

Ⅱ. Japanese historical understanding
　　A. What Japan have made reparation for (Awaya)
　　B. The problem of reparation (Comfort-Women.org)

Ⅲ. Chinese historical understanding
　　A. Lack of reparation for individuals
　　B. Nanjing Incident

Ⅳ. Korean historical understanding
　　A. What Korea accepted
　　B. What Korea did not accept

Ⅴ. Possible solutions

Ⅵ. Conclusion


Hisayuki Tamura
Professor James
ARW Section AE
22 February 2007

The conlfict of historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea

Introduction
　The Second World War ended in 1945 as a Japan when Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration. This war not only made much tragedy but also left many problems. They are restoring diplomatic relation problem, territorial issues, American base problem, Japanese children lefted behind in China and so on. One of the important issues is the conflict of historical understanding. This includes the issue of the war responsibility as a defeated nation. Japan have intended to accept the war responsibility since the end of the Second World War, and Japan mentions the responsibility is now complete. However, some countries such as China and Korea still blame Japan for the war responsibility. This blame can't be overlooked. In order to form a good relationship Japan should take action on historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea because the lack of knowledge of what Japan has done since the Second World War ended is used for stirring anti-Japanese feeling and this feeling will be a wall of cooperation with Japan.

Japanese historical understanding
　As a Japanese historical understanding, Japan claims to have accepted the war responsibility as a defeated nation and Japan claims that paying extra money is unnecessary. Japan paid totally 1 trillion yen for other countries as a reparation(Awaya 52). Moreover, Japan assisted some countries which refused the right of demanding reparation with building factories and many supplies. Therefore, Japan understands Japanese war responsibility is complete. However, Some problems seem to exist. One problem is that reparations was paid for government not individual. Chinese people and Korean people nowadays sue Japan for several reasons, such as comfort woman(Comfort-Women.org). The Other problem is that the war responsibility isn't only reparation, that is, there are other responsibilities. Therefore, Japan need to rethink what the war responsibility is.

Chinese historical understanding
　In the historical understanding of China, China insists that Japan has to adequately atone for aggression during the Second Sino-Japanese War("China,Japan Scholars Discuss History"). In other words, China hasn't admitted Japanese war responsibility yet. This belief is based on the lack of Japanese supports for the individuals. Many Chinese historians mentions that Japan didn’t paid the compensation for the individuals. It is true that Japan didn’t pay compensation for the individuals, but this point of view misses the fact that Japan paid reparation for the Chinese government, and that reparation was used for reconstructing China. In other words, that reparation was actually used for reconstructing each person’s life. Furthermore, Chinese historians claim that Japan should admit that the Imperial Japanese Army killed more than 300,000 people in the 1937 Nanjing Incident("Will Japan-China study～"). This kind of argument is very difficult to solve because the nation and political representatives are in the business of justifying government actions and looking to the past(Yamazaki).

Korean historical understanding
　The historical understanding of Korea is also based on the belief that Japan didn’t do anything for the individuals. Before thinking about what Japan did for Korea, it is necessary to know the Korean condition in the Second World War, that is, the Korean peninsula was ruled by Japan. This means Korean government practically didn’t exist in there. The Korean people was in there but Korean government was not in there. This situation make the understanding more complicated because Korean people was considered as Japanese soldier when Japan ruled the Korean peninsula. If Japanese participated in the war as a soldier, they were given compensation by Japanese goverment after the war. Therefore, Korean people who were considered as Japanese soldier should be given compensation, but they didn’t perceive it because of the special law. This law separated Korean from Japanese unless Korean people was considered as a Japanese during the war. As a result, Korean haven’t perceived compensation from Japan yet. What Japan did for Korea is only paying reparation. That reparation was the same case as China. Japan paid for Korean government but didn’t pay for the individuals.

Possible solution
　　The above shows the different historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea. Japan argues that they did pay compensation for the countries. China and Korea argues that Japan did not pay compensation for the individuals. The problem is whether Japan paid for the country or the individuals. Seeing the definition of the war responsibility, a defeated country’s due is paying something for victorious countries to or countries to restore the desolate countries. Therefore, Japanese argument is not wrong, but Japan should take an effective action on historical understanding because Chinese and Korean people haven't admitted Japanese war responsibility yet and this conflict isn’t useful for Asian society as a partner.

Conclusion
　There seems to be two effective actions. One of two is that Japan keep saying stubbornly that they paid compensation for governments, and it gave them economical wealth. The second action is that Japan accepts their opinions, namely deals with them individually. However, it appears that the latter is better than the former. Most of Japanese politicians tend to prefer to the former but it is difficult to persuade them because they often use the thought that Japan didn’t achieve the war responsibility as diplomatic bargaining chip. The second one doesn’t mean passive. Though Japan deal with them individually, it isn’t all of the cases. Japan should accept the case, such as the special law. When the case is identified completely injustice, Japan should modify the past failure. When Japan can rethink the past failure and modify it, the Asian relationships will be good.　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　(897)

Work Cited

Awaya, Kentaro., et al. Sensousekinin Sengosekinin [war responsibility Compensation]. Asahisensyo, 1994

"China, Japan Scholars Discuss History." Associated Press. 26 Dec.2006.

Comfort-Women.org. 2004. 16 Feb.2007 ＜http://www.comfort-women.org/v2/＞

Yamazaki,Jane W. Japanese Apologies for World War Ⅱ. New York:Routledge, 2006

"Will Japan-China study narrow gaps in history?" The Daily Yomiuri. 24 Dec. 2006

VOF Essay - Minor Assignment 8 - Works Cited*

Work Cited

Awaya, Kentaro., et al. Sensousekinin Sengosekinin [war responsibility Compensation]. Asahisensyo, 1994

"China, Japan Scholars Discuss History." Associated Press. 26 Dec.2006.

Comfort-Women.org. 2004. 16 Feb.2007 ＜http://www.comfort-women.org/v2/＞

Yamazaki,Jane W. Japanese Apologies for World War Ⅱ. New York:Routledge, 2006

"Will Japan-China study narrow gaps in history?" The Daily Yomiuri. 24 Dec. 2006

VOF Essay - Minor Assignment 9 - Winter Project (5%)*

Thesis: Japan should take action on historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea because the lack of knowledge of what Japan did after the Second World War is used for stirring anti-Japanese feeling.

Ⅰ. Introduction
　　A. Backgroud information
　　B. Thesis statement

Ⅱ. The understanding of Japan
　　A. What Japan have made reparation for
　　B. What Japan have not made reparation for

Ⅲ. The understanding of China
　　A. What China accepted
　　B. What China did not accept

Ⅳ. The understanding of Korea
　　A. What Korea accepted
　　B. What Korea did not accept

Ⅴ. The conflict of historical understanding

Ⅵ. Conclusion

Discussion questions
　　Do you think Japanese responsibility of WWⅡ already finished?
　　How do you think about relationship between Japan and China, Korea?
　　Did you study Japanese history? if you not, do you want to study?

VOF Essay - Minor Assignment 7 - Full-length Draft (800+)

The conflict of historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea

　The Second World War ended in 1945 as a Japan when Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration. This war not only made much tragedy but also left many problems. They are restoring diplomatic relation problem, territorial issues, American base problem, Japanese children lefted behind in China and so on. One of the important issues is the conflict of historical understanding. This includes the issue of the war responsibility as a defeated nation. Japan have intended to accept the war responsibility since the end of the Second World War, and Japan mentions the responsibility is now complete. However, some countries such as China and Korea still blame Japan for the war responsibility. This blame can't be overlooked. In order to form a good relationship with them Japan should take an effective action on historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea because an insufficiency of knowledge of what Japan have made reparation for since the end of the Second World War is used for stirring anti-Japanese feeling and this feeling will be a wall of cooperation with Japan.

　As mentioned above, Japan practically have accepted the war responsibility as a defeated nation. Japan paid totally 1 trillion yen for other countries as a compensation. Moreover, Japan assisted some countries which refused the right of demanding compensation with building factories and many supplies. Therefore, Japan understood Japanese war responsibility was complete. However, it seems to be not enough to help them, especially Korea, because Japan established a special law before doing compensation. The special law prevented Korean soldiers and his family from the right to perceive compensation. In other words, Japan didn't deal with them individually. Therefore, Korean people who served in the war still claim compensation for Japan. Taking action on that movement is required for Japan.

　
　The historical understanding of China is based on the belief that is the lack of Japanese supports for the individuals. Many Chinese historians mentions that Japan didn’t paid the compensation for the individuals. It is true that Japan didn’t pay compensation for the individuals, but this point of view misses the fact that Japan paid reparation for the Chinese government, and that reparation was used for reconstructing China. In other words, that reparation was actually used for reconstructing each person’s life.

　The historical understanding of Korea is also based on the belief that Japan didn’t do anything for the individuals. Before thinking about what Japan did for Korea, it is necessary to know the Korean condition in the Second World War, that is, the Korean peninsula was ruled by Japan. This means Korean government practically didn’t exist in there. The Korean people was in there but Korean government was not in there. This situation make the understanding more complicated because Korean people was considered as Japanese soldier when Japan ruled the Korean peninsula. If Japanese participated in the war as a soldier, they were given compensation by Japanese goverment after the war. Therefore, Korean people who were considered as Japanese soldier should be given compensation, but they didn’t perceive it because of the special law. This law separated Korean from Japanese unless Korean people was considered as a Japanese during the war. As a result, Korean haven’t perceived compensation from Japan yet. What Japan did for Korea is only paying reparation. That reparation was the same case as China. Japan paid for Korean government but didn’t pay for the individuals.　

　The above shows the different historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea. Japan argues that they did pay compensation for the countries. China and Korea argues that Japan did not pay compensation for the individuals. The problem is whether Japan paid for the country or the individuals. Seeing the definition of the war responsibility, a defeated country’s due is paying something for victorious countries to or countries to restore the desolate countries. Therefore, Japanese argument is not wrong, but Japan should take an effective action on historical understanding because Chinese and Korean people haven't admitted Japanese war responsibility yet and this conflict isn’t useful for Asian society as a partner.

　There seems to be two effective actions. One of two is that Japan keep saying stubbornly that they paid compensation for governments, and it gave them economical wealth. The second action is that Japan accepts their opinions, namely deals with them individually. However, it appears that the latter is better than the former. Most of Japanese politicians tend to prefer to the former but it is difficult to persuade them because they often use the thought that Japan didn’t achieve the war responsibility as diplomatic bargaining chip. The second one doesn’t mean passive. Though Japan deal with them individually, it isn’t all of the cases. Japan should accept the case, such as the special law. When the case is identified completely injustice, Japan should modify the past failure. When Japan can rethink the past failure and modify it, the Asian relationships will be good.

(820)

VOF Essay - Minor Assignment 6 - Revised Working Outline

Thesis: Japan should take action on historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea because the lack of knowledge of what Japan did after the Second World War is used for stirring anti-Japanese feeling.

Ⅰ. Introduction
　　A. Backgroud information
　　B. Thesis statement

Ⅱ. The understanding of Japan
　　A. What Japan have made reparation for
　　B. What Japan have not made reparation for

Ⅲ. The understanding of China
　　A. What China accepted
　　B. What China did not accept

Ⅳ. The understanding of Korea
　　A. What Korea accepted
　　B. What Korea did not accept

Ⅴ. The conflict of historical understanding

Ⅵ. Conclusion

VOF Essay - Minor Assignment 5 - First Draft (400+)

The conflict of historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea

　The second world war ended in 1945 as a Japan when Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration. This war not only made much tragedy but also left many problems. They are restoring diplomatic relation problem, territorial issues, American base problem, Japanese children lefted behind in China and so on. One of the important issue is the conflict of historical understanding. This includes the issue of the war responsibility as a defeated nation. Japan have intended to accept the war responsibility since the end of the second world war, and Japan mentions the responsibility is now complete. However, some countries such as China and Korea still blame Japan for the war responsibility. This blame can't be overlooked. In order to form a good relationship with them Japan should take effective action on historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea because an in sufficiency of knowledge of what Japan have made reparation for since the end of the second world war is used for stirring anti-Japanese feeling.

　As mentioned above, Japan have accepted the war responsibility as a defeated nation. Japan paid totally 1 trillion yen for other countries as a compensation. Moreover, Japan assisted some countries which refused the right of demanding compensation with building factories and many supplies. Therefore, Japan understanded Japanese war responsibility was complete. However, it seems to be not enough to help them, especially Korea, because Japan established a special law before compensation. The special law prevented Korean soldiers and his family from the right to perceive compensation. In other words, Japan didn't deal with them individually.

　The historical understanding of China is based on the belief that is the lack of Japanese supports for the individuals. Many Chinese historian mentions that Japan didn’t paid the compensation for the individuals. It is true that Japan didn’t pay compensation for the individuals, but this point of view misses the fact that Japan paid reparation for the Chinese government, and that reparation was used for reconstructing China. In other words, that reparation was actually used for reconstructing each person’s life.

　The historical understanding of Korea is also based on the belief that Japan didn’t do anything for the individuals. Before thinking about what Japan did for Korea, it is necessary to know the Korean condition at the Second World War, that is, Korean peninsula was ruled by Japan. This means Korean government practically didn’t exist in there. The Korean people was in there but Korean government was not in there. This situation make the understanding more complicated because Korean people was considered as Japanese soldier when Japan ruled the Korean peninsula. If Japanese participated in the war as a soldier, they were given compensation by Japan after the war. Therefore, Korean people who were considered as Japanese soldier should be given compensation, but they didn’t perceive it because of the special law. This law separated Korean from Japanese unless Korean people was considered as a Japanese during the war. As a result, Korean haven’t perceived compensation from Japan yet. What Japan did for Korea is only paying reparation. That reparation was the same case as China. Japan paid for Korean government but didn’t pay for the individuals.

　The above shows the different historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea. Japan argues that they did pay compensation for the countries. However, China and Korea argues that Japan did not pay compensation for the individuals. Seeing the war responsibility, a defeated country’s due is paying something for victorious countries or countries where were devastated. Therefore, Japanese argument is not wrong, but Japan should take an effective action on historical understanding because this conflict isn’t useful for Asian society as a partner.

　There seems to be two effective actions. One of two is that Japan keep saying stubbornly that they paid compensation for governments, and it gave them economical wealth. The second action is that Japan accepts their opinions, namely deals with them individually. However, it appears that the latter is better than the former. Most of Japanese politicians tend to prefer to the former but it is difficult to persuade them because they often use the thought that Japan didn’t achieve the war responsibility as diplomatic bargaining chip. The second one doesn’t mean passive. Though Japan deal with them individually, it isn’t all of the cases. Japan should accept the case, such as the special law. When the case is identified completely injustice, Japan should modify the past failure. When Japan can rethink the past failure and modify it, the Asian relationships will be good.

(753)

VOF Essay - Minor Assignment 4 - Working Title/Thesis/Outline

Working title: The conflict of historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea

Thesis: Japan should take action on historical understanding between Japan and China, Korea because the lack of knowledge of what Japan have made reparation for since the end of WWⅡ is used for stirring anti-Japanese feeling.

Ⅰ. Introduction
　　A. Backgroud information
　　B. Thesis statement

Ⅱ. The understanding of Japan
　　A. What Japan have made reparation for
　　B. What Japan have not made reparation for

Ⅲ. The understanding of China
　　A. What China accepted
　　B. What China did not accept

Ⅳ. The understanding of Korea
　　A. What Korea accepted
　　B. What Korea did not accept

Ⅴ. The conflict of historical understanding
　　
Ⅵ. Conclusion

VOF Essay - Minor Assignment 3 - Essay Proposal

1) The Second World War ended in 1945, but there are still problems about it. Most of the problems are the responsibility of a defeated nation, such as compensation. 2) Japan accepted the responsibility, but the war responsibility of Japan is still issue in China and Korea. 3) This paper will inform why the war responsibility of Japan is still issue in China and Korea, examine what the problem is and find the way to improve relationships with the countries because the improvement is very important for the Japanese future as an Asian partners. 4) It appears that the lack of knowledge of what Japan have made reparation for since the Second World War ended is used for stirring anti-Japanese feeling. 5) The Daily Yomiuri shows "Sharing a common understanding on history is a terribly difficult task" and suggests that neutral countries are needed to share the understanding. This source seems to be useful for my essay at this stage.

VOF Essay - Minor Assignment 2 - Working Bibliography

Awaya, Tanaka, et al. Sensou Sekinin Sengo Sekinin [war responsibility, compensation]. Asahisensyo,1994.

Ienaga, Saburo. Sensou Sekinin [war responsibility]. Iwanami, 1985.

"Will Japan-China study narrow gaps in history?" The Daily Yomiuri 24 Dec. 2006

VOF Essay - Minor Assignment 1 - Scratch Outline

Topic: The improvement of histiorical understanding (the war responsibility of Japan)

Possible topics: Global warming, The next car industry in Japan, The net in the future

Research question:
Is it possible to improve Chinese and Korean historical understanding of the war responsibility of Japan?

15questions:
What is the responsibility of war?
　When did it start perceiving?
　Who set a standard of it?
　Why does a defeated nation need to compensate?
Why is the war responsibility of Japan still problem in China and Korea?
　Why is the problem visiting yasukuni shrine?
　Was the war responsibility of Japan fullfilled?
　How is the perception for WWⅡ which we, born after WWⅡ, have?
　What is the difference of the perception between before WWⅡ generations and after WWⅡ generations?
How was the case of German?
　What is the difference between Japanese act and German act?
　Why is there no problems against the case of German?
Is it possible to improve Chinese and Korean historical understanding of the war responsibility of Japan?
　If there is still the responsibility of war, What Japan should do?
　What shoule we think toward the idea of Eastern Agian Collective?
　
　

Bioethics Essay - Assignment 9 - Final Draft*

Tamura 1

Outline

　Thesis statement: To avoid having an abortion is preferable even if there seems to be some situations that women have an abortion.

Ⅰ. Introduction

　　A. Background informaion

　　　　ⅰ. The present states of abortion

　　B. Thesis statement

Ⅱ. The two positions of abortion

Ⅲ. For abortion

　　A. Undesirable pregnancy

　　　　ⅰ. Rape (National Police Agency)

　　　　ⅱ. Japanese law (Researchers)

　　B. Economical problems

　　　　ⅰ. Economical factor (Henderson)

　　　　ⅱ. The expense of bring up a child (AIU)

Ⅳ. Against abortion

　　A. Referring to safety

　　　　ⅰ. Unsafe abortions (World Health Organization)

　　B. Suffering from killing an unborn baby

　　　　ⅰ. Risk of depression (Bennet)

　　　　ⅱ. Trauma and Stress (Reardon)

Ⅴ. Evaluation

　　A. Pro-Abortion

　　　　ⅰ. The percentage of the case of rape (Reinhard)

　　B. Anti-Abortion

Ⅵ. Conclusion

　　

Hisayuki Tamura

Professor James

ARW Section AE

24 January 2007

The Better Choice of Abortion

Introduction
　　Nowadays biotechnologies are dramatically more developing than that of a past era. The more biotechnologies are born, the more problems are made. These are some examples, euthanasia, IVF and cloning. These issues have been discussed all over the world because they have many problems causing ethical dilemmas. One of the issues of bioethics is abortion. It is fact that about 46 million abortions occurs per year throughout the world. For example,1.37 million abortions in the United States (The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform), 186,400 abortions in the United Kingdom (Government Statistical Service) and 289,127 abortions in Japan (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare). Moreover, 126,000 abortions occurs per day all over the world, that is to say losing 126,000 new lives per day. This fact can not be overlooked. Abortion makes it possible that a woman decides her childbirth. In other words, she can choose whether she has a baby or not. However, this decision makes dilemmas because it is related to a matter of life and death. This paper will discuss which is the better choice between women having an abortion and not having an abortion, and suggest that to avoid having an abortion is preferable even if there seems to be some situations that women have an abortion.

The two positions of abortion

　　Before beginning, it is necessary to know that there are two types of supporter. They are pro-choice and pro-life. Pro-choice people support having an abortion. On the other hand, pro-life people support the right to live, namely having a baby. Each of them has several reasons why women need to do it or not.

For abortion - Undesirable pregnancy

　　One of the reasons why women need abortions is undesirable pregnancy due to the crime like rape. An average of 2,000 rapes occur each year in Japan (National Police Agency), but this data is an only case which was reported by victims. Thus, there might be more cases because it was not easy for victims with mental injury to report their tragedy. In order to avoid undesirable pregnancy, Japanese law permits an abortion if a pregnancy is the result of rape (Researchers). In this case, abortion seems to be a significant way because women never want pregnancy caused by rape and never want such childbirth. It is difficult that a woman defends herself physically when a man attacks her. Generally men are stronger than women. Therefore, it is hard to take precautions against rape, but the law of abortion is helpful to women.

For abortion - Economical problems

　　In addition to the above, there is another reason why women need abortion. Pro-choice people are worried about women’s economical factors that lead to abortion (Henderson). To raise a child costs a large sum of money. For example, in Japan if having a child it costs parents at least 30 million yen to bring up (AIU). Recently the birth rate is decreasing in Japan, and parents pay more money to raise their child because today people are wanted not a number of children but a child who have a lot of skills, but to learn skills costs much money. The problem is that if parent is too young or single it is hard to pay much money because their income is usually low. They have to work hard, but a hard life makes them exhausted, and raising a child is stressful. As a result, a child abuse sometimes occurs. They need a time of relax supported by surrounding people. However, the present state in Japan is not enough. Therefore, such people who have economical problems can't help but have an abortion.

Against abortion - Referring to safety

　　On the other hands, pro-life people think not only the right to live but also the influences on mother. One of them is safety of abortion. 19 million unsafe abortions still occur around the world annually and that 68,000 of these result in the woman's death (World Health Organization). It is surprised that there is possibility of death of mother instead of death of an unborn baby. In this case abortion makes the opposite effect. Essentially abortion should be the way not to kill women but to protect them from the danger of pregnancy or childbirth. Therefore, if there is the factor causing the woman’s death, people should avoid having an abortion and people need to know the possibility and pay attention to other possibilities of death due to infectious diseases or complications before having an abortion or getting pregnant.

Against abortion - Suffering from killing an unborn baby

　　Furthermore, another influence is mental anguish. Women who have abortions have risk of depression and other mental illness (Bennett). In addition, the existence of trauma after abortion is now almost universally accepted, and also abortion is always stressful. Whether a person can cope with this stress depends on the condition. When a woman's psychological state is already fragile, the stress of an abortion can more easily distress her (Reardon). That is because a feeling of guilt for killing an unborn baby makes a person suffered. Therefore, in order to alleviate that feeling, it is necessary that surrounding people support her as well as she thinks about these in advance of having an abortion.

Evaluation

　　Comparing the idea of pro-choice people with the idea of pro-life people, both sides have some advantages and disadvantages. Having an abortion prevents undesirable pregnancy and economical worries, but abortion sometimes leads a woman to die and makes a woman feel guilt for killing her unborn baby. In addition, abortion caused by rape is actually the rare case, less than 1 persent of all abortion (Reinhard). On the other hand, although not having an abortion have problems with the case of undesirable pregnancy and problems with economical worries because it costs parents much money because of a new family member, not having an abortion does not lose any lives and can be mainly good for mother's mental condition.

Conclusion

　　In conclusion, even if there are such hard situations as this paper show, to avoid having an abortion is preferable because it is possible to overcome the situations. The case of undesirable pregnancy caused by rape is few, though it can not be overlooked. Furthermore, concern about economical difficulty can be resolved by more governmental support.

(1014 words)

Work Cited

　　AIU insurance company in Japan. Economical examination of modern child raising in 2005. American International Group. 17 Jan. 2007 <http://www.aiu.co.jp/about_us/parenting/index.htm>

　　Bennett, Rosemary. Social Affairs Correspondent." exposes women to higher risk of depression ." The Times (London) 27 Oct. 2006, sec. Home News Pg40

　　The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform. Abortion Facts. 17 Jan. 2007 <http://cbrinfo.org/fastfacts.html>

　　Government Statistical Service. The Department of Health. 4 Jul. 2006. 16 Jan. 2007 <http://www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/Publications/PublicationsStatistics/PublicationsStatisticsArticle/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4136852&chk=Ei3Teu>

　　Henderson, Tom. "It seems we all want to save the world; go figure" Lewiston Morning Tribune (Idaho), 10 September. 2006, sec.Pg.1F,

　　Japan. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. 16 Jan. 2007 <http://www.mhlw.go.jp/toukei/saikin/hw/eisei/05/kekka5.html>

　　Japan. National Police Agency. A police white paper in 2006. 17 Jan. 2007 <http://www.npa.go.jp/hakusyo/index.htm>

　　Reardon, David D. Identifying High Risk Abortion Patients. (Lifeissues.net) Kochi, Japan. 16 Jan. 2007 <http://lifeissues.net/writers/rea/rea_29highrisk.html>

　　Reinhard, David. "PARENTAL NOTIFICATION Yes, but what about a rape-and-incent exception?" The Sunday Oregonian 15 Oct. 2006.

　　"Researchers: Allow abortion in case of genetic disorders." The Daily Yomiuri 31 Mar.1997

　　World Health Organization. Unsafe abortion - Global and regional estimates of the incidence of unsafe abortion and associated mortality in 2000 - 4th edition. 2004. 16 Jan.2007. <http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/publications/unsafe_abortion_estimates_04/estimates.pdf>

Bioethics Essay - Minor Assignment 8 - Full-length Draft (800-1000+)

　The Better Choice of Abortion

　Nowadays biotechnologies are dramatically more developing than that of a past era. The more biotechnologies are born, the more problems are made. These are some examples, euthanasia, IVF and cloning. These issues have been discussed all over the world because they have many problems causing ethical dilemmas. One of the issues of bioethics is abortion. Abortion makes it possible that a woman decides her childbirth. In other words, she can choose whether she has a baby or not. However, this decision makes dilemmas. This paper will discuss which is the better choice between women having an abortion and not having an abortion, and suggest that people should avoid having abortion even if there seems to be some situations that women have an abortion.

　 Before beginning, it is necessary to know that there are two types of supporters. They are pro-choice and pro-life. Pro-choice people support having an abortion. On the other hand, pro-life people support having a baby. Each of them has several reasons why women need to do it or not. One of the reasons why women need abortions is undesirable pregnancy due to the crime like rape. Japan National Police Agency reported that about 2000 rapes were occurred from 2001 to 2005, but this data is only case which was reported by victims. Thus, there might be more cases because it was not easy for victims with mental injury to report their tragedy. In order to avoid undesirable pregnancy, Japanese law permits an abortion if a pregnancy is the result of rape (Researchers). In this case, abortion seems to be a significant way because women never want pregnancy caused by rape and never want such childbirth. It is difficult that a woman defends herself physically when a man attacks her. Generally men are stronger than women. Therefore, the law of abortion is helpful to women.
　　In addition to the above, there is another reason why women need abortion. Pro-choice people are worried about women’s social and economical factors that lead to abortion (Tom). To raise a child costs a large sum of money. According to AIU Insurance office, if having a child it costs at least 30 million yen. Recently the birth rate is decreasing in Japan, and parents pay more money to raise their child because today people are wanted not a number of children but a child who have a lot of skills, but to learn skills costs much money. The problem is that if parent is too young or single it is hard to pay much money because their income is usually low. These parents have to work hard, but a hard life makes them stressful, and also raising a child is stressful. As a result, a child abuse sometimes occurs. They need a time of relax supported by surrounding people. However, the present state in Japan is not enough. Therefore, such people who have social and economical problems can't help but have an abortion.

　 　On the other hands, pro-life people think not only a child's right to live but also the influences on mother. One of them is safety of abortion. According to WHO, 19 million unsafe abortions still occur around the world annually and that 68,000 of these result in the woman's death (Unsafe abortion). It is surprised that abortion has a possibility of killing mother instead of death of an unborn baby. Therefore, if abortion has a factor causing mother’s death, people should not have an abortion or people need to know it and need to pay attention to other possibilities of death due to infectious diseases or complications before having an abortion or getting pregnant.
　　Furthermore, another influence is mental anguish. Women who have abortions have risk of depression and other mental illness (Bennett). In addition, Reardon mentions that the existence of trauma after abortion is now almost universally accepted, and also abortion is always stressful. Whether a person can cope with this stress depends on the condition. When a woman's psychological state is already fragile, the stress of an abortion can more easily distress her. That is because a feeling of guilt for killing an unborn baby makes a person suffered. Therefore, in order to alleviate that feeling, it is necessary that surrounding people support her as well as she thinks about these in advance.

　　Comparing the idea of pro-choice people with that of pro-life people, both sides have some advantages and disadvantages. Having an abortion prevents undesirable childbirth and economical worries, but at the same time abortion has a lost child and leads a woman to die or at least causes a woman a feeling of guilt for killing her unborn baby. Although not having an abortion include a possibility of spending much money because of a new family member, it gives us great hope.
　　In conclusion, abortion should not be done even if there are some hard situations because it is possible to solve the problems.

(818)

Bioethics Essay - Minor Assignment 7 - Works Cited*

　　Abortionfacts.com. 3 Nov. 2006. Heritage House'76. 16 Jan. 2007 <http://www.abortionfacts.com/statistics/statistics.asp>

　　Bennett, Rosemary. Social Affairs Correspondent." exposes women to higher risk of depression ." The Times (London) 27 Oct. 2006, sec. Home News Pg40

　　Government Statistical Service. The Department of Health. 4 Jul. 2006. 16 Jan. 2007 <http://www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/Publications/PublicationsStatistics/PublicationsStatisticsArticle/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4136852&chk=Ei3Teu>

　　

　　Henderson, Tom. "It seems we all want to save the world; go figure" Lewiston Morning Tribune (Idaho), 10 September. 2006, sec.Pg.1F,

　　Japan. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. 16 Jan. 2007 <http://www.mhlw.go.jp/toukei/saikin/hw/eisei/05/kekka5.html>

　　Reardon, David D. Identifying High Risk Abortion Patients. (Lifeissues.net) Kochi, Japan. 16 Jan. 2007 <http://lifeissues.net/writers/rea/rea_29highrisk.html>

　 "Researchers: Allow abortion in case of genetic disorders." The Daily Yomiuri 31 Mar.1997

　 World Health Organization. Unsafe abortion - Global and regional estimates of the incidence of unsafe abortion and associated mortality in 2000 - 4th edition. 2004. 16 Jan.2007. <http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/publications/unsafe_abortion_estimates_04/estimates.pdf>

　

Bioethics Essay - Minor Assignment 6 - Revised Working Outline*

Title: The better choice of abortion

Thesis: There are some situations that women have an abortion, but abortion shouldn't be done.

Outline:
Ⅰ. Introduction　
　A. Background informaion　
　B. Thesis statement

Ⅱ. For abortion　
　A. Undesirable pregnancy　
　B. Social and Economical problems

Ⅲ. Against abortion　
　A. Referring to safety　
　B. Suffering from killing an unborn baby

Ⅳ. Comparing abortion with anti-abortion

Ⅴ. Conclusion

Bioethics Essay - Minor Assignment 5 - First Draft (400+)

The better choice of abortion

　　There are many issues of bioethics causing ethical dilemmas all over the world. They are all related to a matter of life and death. One of the issues of bioethics is abortion. It is possible that a woman chooses whether she has a baby or not. This paper will discuss whether women should have an abortion or not. There are some situations that women have an abortion, but abortion shouldn't be done.

　　People who think women need abortion are called "pro-choice". They have several reasons why women need abortion. One of them is undesirable pregnancy like rape. In fact, japanese law permits an abortion if a pregnancy is the result of rape (Researchers). When a man attacks a woman, it seems to be difficult that she defends herself because generally men are stronger than women. Therefore, abortion can be a significant way in this case.

　　In addition to the above, there is another reason why women need abortion. Abortion advocates focus on helping women and children and alleviating the social, economical factors that lead to abortion (Tom). It cost a large sum of money to raise a child. If parents are young, it is hard for them to pay. Therefore, such people who have social and economical problems can't help but have an abortion.

　　On the other hands, abortion opponents think not only a child's right to live but also the influences on mother. One of them is safety of abortion. According to WHO, 19 million unsafe abortions occur around the world annually and that 68,000 of these result in the woman's death (Unsafe abortion). It is surprised that abortion has a possibility of killing mother instead of death of an unborn baby. Therefore, if abortion has a danger of death, people shouldn't have an abortion or people need to care about it and need to know other possibilities of death due to infectious deseases or complications before having an abortion or getting pregnant.

　　Furthermore, another influence is mental anguish. Women who have abortions have risk of depression and other mental illness (Bennett). In addition, the existence of trauma after aborion is now almost universally accepted, and also abortion is always stressful. Whether a person can cope with this stress depends on the condition. When a woman's psychological state is already fragile, the stress of an abortion can more easily distress her (Reardon). That is because a feeling of guilt for killing an unborn baby makes a person suffered. Therefore, it is necessary that surrounding people support her as well as she thinks about these in advance.

　　Comparing the idea of abortion advocates with that of abortion opponents, both sides have some advantages and disadvantages. Having an abortion prevents undesirable childbirth, but at the same time abortion may leads a woman to die or at least causes a woman a feeling of guilt for killing her unborn baby. Although not having an abortion include a possibility of spending much money because of a new family member, it gives us great hope.

　　In conclusion, abortion shouldn't be done even if there are some hard situations except undesirable childbirth like indecent.

(520)

Work cited

　　"Researchers: Allow abortion in case of genetic disorders." The Daily Yomiuri 31 Mar.1997

　　Henderson, Tom. "It seems we all want to save the world; go figure" Lewiston Morning Tribune (Idaho), 10 September. 2006, sec.Pg.1F,

　　 World Health Organization. (2004). Unsafe abortion: global and regional estimates of unsafe abortion and associated mortality in 2000

　　 Rosemary Bennett, Social Affairs Correspondent." exposes women to higher risk of depression ." The Times (London) 27 Oct. 2006, sec. Home News Pg40

　　 David C. Reardon. "Identifying High Risk Abortion Patients" <http://lifeissues.net/writers/rea/rea_29highrisk.html>