Philippa Foot discusses the moral dilemma surrounding abortion and the "double effect" doctrine, which is often invoked by Catholics to justify certain actions. The doctrine distinguishes between direct and indirect intentions, suggesting that it is permissible to bring about harm that is not directly intended. Foot examines various scenarios, such as saving a mother's life by killing the fetus, and argues that the distinction between direct and indirect intentions is not always clear-cut. She highlights the complexity of moral decision-making and the need to consider the broader context of duties and rights. Foot concludes that the distinction between direct and indirect intentions plays a minor role in moral judgments, while the distinction between avoiding harm and providing aid is more significant. She emphasizes the importance of weighing the potential consequences and the ethical implications of actions, rather than solely relying on the doctrine of double effect.Philippa Foot discusses the moral dilemma surrounding abortion and the "double effect" doctrine, which is often invoked by Catholics to justify certain actions. The doctrine distinguishes between direct and indirect intentions, suggesting that it is permissible to bring about harm that is not directly intended. Foot examines various scenarios, such as saving a mother's life by killing the fetus, and argues that the distinction between direct and indirect intentions is not always clear-cut. She highlights the complexity of moral decision-making and the need to consider the broader context of duties and rights. Foot concludes that the distinction between direct and indirect intentions plays a minor role in moral judgments, while the distinction between avoiding harm and providing aid is more significant. She emphasizes the importance of weighing the potential consequences and the ethical implications of actions, rather than solely relying on the doctrine of double effect.