Abortion: A Woman's Right To Life

Ever since the case of Roe v. Wade in 1973, abortion has been one of the most contentious issues in our society. Which later leads to the debate between pro-life and pro-choice. On the one hand, the pro-life perspective feels that all children should have the right to live. On the other hand, the pro-choice view believes that a woman should have the right to choose what is right for her and the situation at hand. This debate today has widely impacted everyone in the United States.

The right of this issue is the Right to Obtain an Abortion. The right at issue is whether or not unwed mothers under 18 should have parental consent to have an abortion. There is an unremunerated right at issue in this situation because the Illinois Law doesn’t explain if they requires both parent’s consent or just one parent or if the mother is under 18 and married, will she need the father’s permission to obtain an abortion. This is a substantive due process because this law is interfering with your individual privacy rights. The case ruling of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the court reaffirmed its 1973 decision on Roe v. Wade, which established its constitutional right to obtain

On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in the landmark case Roe v. Wade, that states could not restrict the right for a woman to have an abortion. Although more than forty years have passed, the controversy surrounding abortion rages on. Many different arguments are used in order to attack or defend abortion. It’s important to look at each of these from as objective of a lens a possible to keep bias, while unavoidable, to a minimum. Essentially each side of this argument boils their points down to be as follows, abortion should be included in a woman’s constitutional right to privacy, while the other side relentlessly argues that abortion is murder. What this says is that the side for abortion doesn’t see the unborn child as a person with equal rights to the mother, while the side against abortion feels that the unborn child in fact has the rights of any person including that of the mother. There are many areas where this argument can be taken obviously, but right now the point that really needs to be evaluated is just this. Is a human being’s fetus a person with the same rights as any other person, or does a pregnant woman have power over the life of the fetus inside of her? This question is not a straight forward one, but the answer boils down to be that based on the necessary requirements to be considered an individual person, the developing embryo inside of a woman does not meet the sufficient conditions to be classified as a person. In order to come to

A small number of issues have promoted such debate as has the topic of abortion. The contributors in the abortion debate not merely have definitely-fixed beliefs, but every group has a self-designated designation that plainly reflects what they consider to be the necessary issues. On one side, the pro-choice supporters see personal choice as fundamental to the debate: If a woman cannot decide to end an unnecessary pregnancy, a state which affects her body and perhaps her whole life, then she has lost one of her most fundamental human rights (Templeton 2011).

Although the function of a hospital is to treat and care for patients of necessary needs, the hospital runs on the basis of businesses, inputting medical interventions to make more available room and profit. One commentator describes the the medical interventions as like a domino effect, as the cascade of series rumble down, when the intervention was not even necessary in the first place (The Business of Being Born 12:42). Physicians may use EPM readings to bolster their assertions that women refusing cesareans are endangering their fetuses and must therefore be ordered to undergo the procedure (Fried 259). To increase the cases of cesarean birth deliveries, hospitals will attempt to speed up the process of labors by using the doses of epidural

One of the most influential philanthropists of all time, Mother Teresa, once explained that to her the greatest destructor of peace was “abortion, because it is a war against the child- a direct killing of the innocent child- murdered by the mother herself.” In the United States, four in ten of unintended pregnancies result in abortion culminating in approximately 1.21 million abortions each year.1 Abortion, defined as the removal of a fertilized egg from the uterus, has been a controversial issue in our society. On January 1973 the Supreme Court of the U.S gave the right to abortion on Roe vs Wade. This monumental decision gives the absolute right to abortion regardless of the stage of pregnancy, not limited to the first trimester as it

Judith Jarvis Thomson argued that the “the impermissibility of abortion does not follow from the premises that every fetus is a person and that every person has a right to life” (Thomson) Thomson distinguishes between what we ought to do versus what we are morally required to. This essay will show how abortions are permissible and not permissible according to Thomson.

Abortion has many issues to be put into consideration, especially in case of unwanted pregnancies. They normally have effects that are majorly negative on both the children and the women. According to women’s point of view and other feminists, abortion should not only be considered as freedom of choice and overlook other considerations. Considerations like only women and not men can bear children, they are subjected to sexual breaches, they are not engaged as much as men in political or familial decision-making and

There are very few people who believe that abortion is wrong in all cases, most can agree on that it is permissible to have an abortion to save the life of the mother. However, the controversy is where to draw the line? In the famous case of Roe V Wade back in 1973, a woman named Jane Roe, claimed she was raped, and during that time the state of Texas had a law that stated abortion is permissible only to save the life of the mother. Roe challenged that law and took it to the Supreme Court where they would then rule that the Texas law is unconstitutional and the choice to have an abortion is a private decision between a woman and her physician. Additionally, they expressed that it was not the place for the government to regulate a woman's body and abortion is permissible for any reason, but only during the first trimester of the pregnancy. The reasoning behind placing a time frame of the first trimester was due to the fact that back in 1973, late-term abortions posed a great danger to the life of the mother. However, with modern medicine, late-term abortions are no longer nearly as dangerous and the debate of abortion is brought back into the spotlight. Mary Anne Warren and Judith Jarvis Thomson lean towards the more liberal perspective and generally believe in women’s right to self-determination. On the other hand, opposers like John T. Noonan and Don Marquis have a more conservative standpoint and consider abortion to be overall immoral. I would agree with Thomson’s moderate viewpoint, that abortions should be permissible to save the life of the mother, in cases of rape, and reasonable precaution because it accounts for the appreciation of life but also concludes that abortion is permissible in a wide variety of cases.

A female who is in a life or death situation due to her fetus should have the alternative to terminate her pregnancy. In the article,”Doctors say abortions do sometimes save women’s lives,” it says,”to allow abortion if necessary to prevent the death of a mother.” An example of this is with a woman named Cecily Kellogg, a 44 year old writer who lives near Philadelphia, was put in a situation where she was 6 months pregnant with 2 twin boys and developed severe preeclampsia. One fetus had died and she dealt with her liver shutting down, her kidneys shutting down, and was expecting to seize any minute. Doctors had to quickly dilate her cervix and perform an abortion to save her life. “I fought it- But they told me I would die- that it was either

Forty-two years after the highly controversial case Roe vs. Wade, that made it legal for women to have an abortion, society continues to debate whether or not women should have the right to have an abortion. Judith Jarvis Thomson’s famous article “A Defense of Abortion” defends a women’s right to have an abortion. However, I disagree with Thomson’s defense against abortions, and believe that abortions are highly immoral and should be illegal.

To them the fetus is not viable until birth, so it is ok. However, medical researches have proven the fetus to be a living organism. So giving women the right to control her body should not give her right to that life too.

The U.S. Supreme Court gave women the right to abortions in 1973 and this law has been effective and upheld to this day in most cases. Although abortions have been made legal by the Constitution, some states have made them illegal, causing difficulties for women to get them. This has put women in countries without access to them in potential danger. Without proper access to abortions, women are at a risk of serious health complications that can often lead to death. These issues have been especially prevalent in underdeveloped countries. We cannot allow the man, the one that will never understand what it's like to abort a child, to determine what we, as women, can do with our bodies. Taking away a woman's right to abort is a crime against a

The decision to end the life of someone without their own consent has caused great disruption among Americans. Before the civil rights movement, Americans idealized the idea that abortion was ultimately prohibited due to the fact that religion predominated the beliefs of the people. Now in a rapid changing-liberal society, people are questioning if prohibiting a woman from aborting is denying her inalienable right of freedom as listed under the First Amendment. The right to abortion should be left in the hands of a woman’s personal decision rather than being obligated to live with the results of something she never wanted.

There is widespread debate in American society on whether abortion should be an accepted and legal medical practice. Those who oppose abortion claim that fetuses are human persons with a right to life which must be protected by law, even at the earliest stages after conception. Those who support a woman’s right to choose whether she will carry an infant to term argue that the mother’s rights to bodily autonomy and to decide whether or not to have a child outweigh any rights a fetus might have. This paper will introduce the abortion rights debate in the context of social justice and will then explore two facets of the pro-choice argument: abortion as a tool to ensure women’s bodily autonomy and the impact access to abortion has on women and infants.