Abortion Should Be Banned After 20 Weeks Of Pregnancy

Since the Texas abortion laws were so unclear many doctors and hospitals turned away most abortion cases to avoid significant penalties such as, a felony sanction of up to five years in jail and/or revocation of their medical license.

By the 1960’s, states began to reconsider the legalization of abortion in response to the high rate of hospital admissions resulting from illegal abortions and a change in public opinion (“Abortion in Law, History, and Religion”). By the early 1970’s, 17 states had altered their abortion laws towards liberalization (“Abortion in Law, History, and Religion”). In 1973, the Supreme Court declared in Roe vs. Wade that most existing state laws were unconstitutional. The case ruled out any legislative interference in the first trimester of pregnancy and put limits on what restrictions could be passed on abortions in later stages of pregnancy (Sauer).

- In New York Times of February 27, 2016, similar to ones around country, the 2013Texas’ law was written by anti-abortion activists with only one purpose of shutting down clinics since its two main requirements have nothing to do with protecting women’s health. First, admitting privileges are often hard for doctors to get for bureaucratic reasons. Second, ambulatory surgical center standards are prohibitively expensive to meet and medically unnecessary due to the fact that abortion is one of the safest of all medical procedures, with a complication rate less than one-tenth of 1%. (The Editorial Board,

“Texas’s new strict legislation is already forcing women to leave the state in order to receive medical services in neighboring states more sympathetic to their desires to obtain an abortion (Hagle).” This is causing many problems for expectant mothers, especially those who have preexisting genetic medical conditions. Many time a mother may have some type of illness that can be given to a fetus during pregnancy. Sometimes these issues are seen during a routine ultrasound and sometimes there are not noticed until the time of birth. This is causing woman who live in the state of Texas to have to cross state lines when they find out something is wrong with their baby and choose to terminate the pregnancy.

U.S. Supreme Court stands firm on the idea of restricting a woman 's right to an abortion to the individual state. Forty-three states ban abortions after a certain time period in a woman’s pregnancy. Nineteen of those states prohibits abortions at fetal viability, while three states ban the procedure in the third trimester and the last twenty-two prohibits after twenty weeks’ post-fertilization. Some of these bans have exceptions when the procedure preserves the health or life of the mother (Guttmacher Institute). The remaining states attract the most patients from across the nation and around

The topic of reproductive rights surrounding women in Texas has been a hot buttoned issue since the closing of many reproductive centers across the state. Recently damaging abortion restrictions were passed and therefor encroach on women’s reproductive rights even more by decreasing access to abortion care. Texas’ 84th Legislature, both passed HB 3994 as a law and had it Governor Abbott make it effective with his signature on July 8, or this year. This law complicates access to abortion services for mistreated and neglected minors and for those who do not possess specific identification cards in Texas.

The section of the law mandates that abortion doctors ought to have registration at a standing hospital in case of an emergency. However, organizations have filed suit against the enactment of the law before it came into action on October 29, 2013, including the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union and clinic owners (“American Civil Liberties”). Based on Erik Eckholm’s New York Times article “Judge in Texas Partly Rejects Abortion Law,” once the law was taken into court, Judge Lee Yeakel of United States District Court in Austin, Texas blocked part of the law based on "the act's admitting-privileges provision is without a rational basis and places a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus.” Although the majority of Texans stands against abortion they still ought to respect women’s reproductive rights.

In the case of Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas v. Abbott (2014), The American Civil Liberties Union, The Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and a Texas law firm filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of several women’s health-care providers in Texas for seeking to enforce their rights and those of patients for declaratory judgment and pertaining to the regulation of surgical abortions and abortion-inducing drugs by enjoining two provisions of the 2013 Texas House Bill No. 2. (Planned Parent Hood v. Abbott, 2014). To many, Planned Parenthood challenges the state of Texas abortion law as it places an unconstitutional restriction on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion. It also

Before 1973, abortion access was determined by state legislature for each individual state with no consistency across the United States. Some states allowed abortions but most state statues heavily restricted or completely banned abortion. The restricted states would generally only allow abortion in the event of rape, incest, fetal anomalies, or the woman’s life is at risk. The state of Texas enforced a state statute that made it illegal for an abortion to be performed unless the woman’s

This is that due to the fact that abortion access in Texas has been considerably declining mainly because of the passage and proclamation of the Texas Senate Bill, it is more prudent to engage the moral and divine angel of the entire matter. This is after statistical evidence shows that there were approximately 44 different facilities which are known to have been performing abortions in Texas in the year 2011 alone and futuristic projections deem that these has dropped to six facilities currently in 2015. This can even be proved by those who tried to keep the doors of these abortion enhancing facilities open but they failed miserably. For instance, Amy Hagstrom Miller who happens to be the chief executive of a renowned health fraternity called the Whole Woman’s Health group was unable to successfully challenge the provisions and stipulations of the Texas Senate Bill in a court of law (Thomas

Should abortion laws in the state of Texas be more strict? Every state has different steps

Although the pro-life side claims they’re defending the women of Texas, they truthfully don’t need protecting: abortions are one of the safest medical procedures to date. According to the latimes, “There is a less than 0.3% risk of major complications following an abortion, and the risk of complications arising specifically from first-term abortions is 0.05%”. Also, there are less invasive ways to carry out abortions. In September 2000, the FDA approved the drug mifepristone, which is used to block the production of hormones that are needed for the development of a fetus. While there are a few reported deaths by the associated disease sepsis, the risk is only about 1/100000 in women undergoing medical abortion (FDA). The most important point is that the pro-life side claims to fight for the protection of women, but they truthfully end up hurting them because they take away their entire say in the matter. By rejecting the notion that abortions can be at all good, the decision is immediately taken from the woman who is carrying the unborn child and whose life is being deeply impacted by that choice. Therefore, any restriction on abortion is disrespectful and wrong.

Abortion is a very touchy subject. For some, there were tears of joy, shock and sighs of relief. For others, there was disappointment. The U.S. Supreme Court gave people the right to abortion. In Texas, the "Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt case began, reactions were strong and divided, as they were nationwide." ""I am beyond elated," Amy Hagstrom Miller, founder and CEO of Whole Woman's Health, said in a written statement. "After years of fighting heartless, anti-abortion Texas politicians who would seemingly stop at nothing to push abortion out of reach, I want everyone to understand: you don't mess with Texas, you don't mess with Whole Woman's Health, and you don't mess with this beautiful, powerful movement of people dedicated to reproductive health, rights, and justice."" The Supreme Court was troubled when deciding whether "two key provisions in Texas' House Bill 2, enacted in 2013, constituted an "undue burden" on women seeking abortions in the Lone Star State." The state argued that the law protected

Texas continues to fight women’s rights groups for the life of the “unborn child” and has won on many levels. According to the Texas Abortion Laws, Texas includes mandatory ultrasound imaging and parental consent for minors, and women must make at least four visits to a doctor and receive an ultrasound. Women may only receive a third trimester abortion if it is necessary to prevent death or substantial risk of serious impairment to a women’s physical or mental health, or if fetus has severe and irreversible abnormality. Texas considers an illegal abortion if it destroys the vitality or life of child in birth or before (which otherwise would have been born alive); operating a facility without a license, failure to meet Board of Health standards, or failure to make reports to Department of Health; act preformed after pregnancy with intent to cause termination of pregnancy other than for purpose of birth of live fetus or removal

In 1992, Roe v. Wade was upheld in Casey v. Planned Parenthood. However, the Supreme Court had become significantly more conservative in that time, and this ruling favored the states‘ rights to establish tighter abortion restrictions. In Pennsylvania, women were only permitted first trimester abortions if they had been given information about the fetus’s gestational state and the dangers of having the procedure. A married women was also required to inform her husband prior to having the abortion, and minors had to seek approval from at least one parent unless given a legal bypass. On top of these restrictions, there was also a mandatory 24-hour waiting period (McBride, “Casey v. Planned Parenthood”).