Abortion Vs Abortion Essay

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).

Abortion has been one of the most popular and argumentative topics that has still yet to be settled. Ultimately the question we can ask when trying to solve this issue is whether or not pregnant women should have the right to kill an unborn baby. Abortion is the ending of a pregnancy before birth takes place and is a moral wrong. Can we as a society call ourselves human if we allow the deaths of unborn babies to take place? Those who take the side of pro-choice or as also known as pro-abortion often use statements concerning life, humanity, human rights and freedom to support their claims. I believe abortion should be illegal because we as a society must protect the human lives that are in danger whether or not they are in their first

Abortion has been and still is one of the most controversial topics in American culture. The reason for the controversy is the different viewpoints of this very personal matter. Some believe that abortion is the same as murder. Others believe it’s a personal choice which only they have the right to make. Due to the nature of the procedure and the concerns associated with ending a pregnancy, abortion will continue to top the list of “touchy” subjects in American politics and culture. As a pro-choice advocate, it is important for the right to have an abortion to be established and protected.

Abortion has been a complex social issue in the United States ever since restrictive abortion laws began to appear in the 1820s. By 1965, abortions had been outlawed in the U.S., although they continued illegally; about one million abortions per year were estimated to have occurred in the 1960s. (Krannich 366) Ultimately, in the 1973 Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade, it was ruled that women had the right to privacy and could make an individual choice on whether or not to have an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy. (Yishai 213)

In the case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Casey fought against the state of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Abortion Control act. The restrictions required the woman to give a written informed consent, seek parental consent if she was a minor, and notify her husband if she married. With the same violation of the fourteenth amendment as the Roe v. Wade case, the courts saw favour to Casey. While the majority of the restrictions were supported by the courts, the requirement of the husband’s notification was not. The result of this case added support of the decision of Roe

The landmark "Roe v. Wade" ruling began an era of nationally sanctioned abortion rights and a new wave of controversy (History). The controversy often took shape as court cases aimed at reversal. Two pivotal cases were: The Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth and the Supreme Court declares a statute that requires parental and spousal consent for abortions unconstitutional.

In 1973, Roe v. Wade ruled a state law that banned abortions, except in the cases of risking the life of the mother, unconstitutional (Garrow 833). The Court ruled that states were forbidden from regulating or outlawing abortion performed during the first trimester of a woman’s pregnancy, could pass abortion regulations if they were related to the health of the mother in the second and third trimesters, and pass abortion laws protecting the life of the fetus in the third trimester (Paltrow 18). However, the primary concern would remain to be the mother’s health, regardless. Roe v. Wade, controversial since it was decided, divided America and continues to spark debates,

Beginning in the mid-nineteenth century, illegal abortion efforts differed between states. Medical procedures at this time are very dangerous and high mortality. Texas and many other states have a legal illicit abortion except for maternity life-threatening (History of abortion). In 1973, the case of the Supreme Court, Roe vs. Wade, concludes that it is the mother's choice when it comes to children and abortion has been legalized nationally. After Roe vs. Wade, there were a lot of riots and even hospital bombings (History of abortion). Then, in 1977, Hyde passed, prohibiting low-income mothers from paying for abortion with Medicaid unless their lives are in danger; they are raped, or pregnant as a result of the incest. By the end of 1991, a law was passed that prohibited doctors and councils in federal-sponsored clinics to advise or refer patients to abortion (history of abortion). A year later, the Supreme Court case, the Pennsylvania Parenthood Casey's Pennsylvania Parenthood Plan, allowed states to impose restrictions on abortion, as long as the restrictions did not place an "excessive burden" for women (history of

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

Casey was another case that the Supreme Court had debated on to decide the rights of states to limit an abortion. This was a case that was against the legislature of Pennsylvania called the Abortion Control Act which required informed consent and 24 hours of waiting period before an abortion. This Abortion Control Act also required minors who wanted to have an abortion to get their parents consent and married woman were require to notify their husband of an abortion plan. The ruling of the case was 5 to 4 in which the court allowed the restrictions provided by the act but also stopped the state from creating an undue burden strict rules that may stop the woman decision to an abortion. The case ruled in favor of the state that required woman who want an abortion to be inform of the procedure, receive consent from their husbands, and wait 24 hours. Also, if a minor want to get an abortion they need to obtain parental consent, without violating the right to abortion as guaranteed by Roe vs. Wade. As Justice O’Connor, Kennedy and Souter

Casey. In 1992, the case Planned Parenthood arose as a case that challenged restrictive Pennsylvania state laws that restricted abortion. It required doctors to inform the mother of health risks, required women to inform their husbands, minors to inform their parents, and imposed a twenty-four hour wait period before the procedure could be completed (505 U.S. 833, 1992). The District Court of Pennsylvania found all of these provisions to be unconstitutional under the legal reasoning in Roe. In the Appellate Courts, all of the restrictions were declared constitutional except for the spousal notification clause (505 U.S. 833, 1992) When it reached the Supreme Court, there were new justices on the bench, comprised of all Republican appointees. Casey gained a great deal of media attention for the possibility that the conservative bench could overturn Roe. In a 5-4 decision, the Court's reasoning reaffirmed Roe, but upheld most of the Pennsylvania provisions using the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The opinion contained a novel standard to determine the validity of abortion restrictions, thus eliminating the previous trimester rule. The new standard asks whether the restriction has the purpose of imposing an "undue burden", which is a "substantial obstacle in the path of the woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability" (505 U.S. 833, 1992). Under

It was 19 years later when Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania V. Robert P. Casey, another abortion case, was brought to the Supreme Court. Prior to the Casey ruling, states had the power to regulate abortions only in the third trimester. Often times, states who opposed the ruling in Roe would create additional laws as to make it more difficult to get an abortion. One of these states, Pennsylvania, formed the Abortion Control Act, requiring “an “informed consent” provision requiring, at least 24 hours in advance, the physician performing the abortion to inform the pregnant woman of alternatives to abortion; the risks associated with the procedure; the estimated gestational age of the child at the time of the procedure; the possible availability of state economic assistance for prenatal care, childbirth and neonatal care.” Women also needed a ‘“spousal notification,” requiring women to give prior notice to their husbands. In Casey, the aspects pertaining to spousal notification of the Abortion Control Act were ruled as unlawful. Having the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a fetus that is not yet viable is an undue burden on the women. Restrictions can be placed on

“Abortion is the spontaneous or artificially induced expulsion of an embryo or fetus” (Abortion, 2002). An artificially induced abortion is the type referred to in the legal context. Abortions happen in different situations. The question comes when is it the right or wrong choice. The root question becomes the moment a fetus becomes a person and entitled to rights. The fetus could be a person at conception, during the pregnancy, or at birth. The deciding moment differs from the Pro-life group and Pro-choice group. After critically analyzing four different arguments about the pros and cons of abortion, one will be able to understand the ethical, moral, and

The issue of abortion is a controversial one; there are arguments on both sides of the debate. In 1973 the national case of Roe v. Wade, sparked political decisions that created a national right to abortion. Further, "Roe v. Wade declared that unborn children are not `persons ' nor are they entitled to the same constitutional protection as `born children '" (Baird, Rosenbaum, 2001). However, Roe v. Wade did not end the debate, nor, did it stop both sides for continuing the fight for their individual beliefs. On the one hand, pro-choice’s believe that woman are entitled to have abortions. Stating that an unborn child is under the rights of the pregnant women. On the other hand, pro-lifers believe that a woman should not have the right to obtain an abortion, stating that an unborn child is a human deserving the same constitutional rights as a child that has been born. The political goal most frequently mentioned by pro-lifers has been a Human Life Amendment (HLA) to thus, reverse Roe v. Wade. The HLA would declare unborn children to be "persons" deserving equal protection under the Constitution. From an ethical standpoint, one can take either side, for not only these reasons but also many more that we will further explore. I personally think that abortion is a decision that can only be made by the person in question, and not between that person and the government or an HLA. We well first look at the overall argument of the pro-choice side. After which, we will delve into the

This case, in the end, guaranteed women the right to an abortion, and therefore set the precedent for which level of government would ultimately end up deciding policy on abortion. Thirty years later, the Nebraska court of appeals struck down a law banning partial-birth abortion, but appellate courts in other states upheld their bans on partial-birth abortion. In 2000, the case went to the Supreme Court, who questioned if the Nebraska ban violated the rights guaranteed in the 14th Amendment. They ultimately ruled that the ban placed an undue burden on a woman’s right to an abortion, and therefore did violate the rights in the 14th Amendment. Even more recent was the Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt case in 2016. The Texas legislature passed a law called the House Bill 2, which placed restrictive provisions on abortion and where abortion could take place. The Supreme Court questioned if the court’s assessment of the burden placed on abortion rights take into account how much abortion restrictions actually serve the government’s stated health interest. The Court decided that House Bill 2 did not give enough medical benefits to counter the burdens placed on women who are trying to follow up on their constitutional right to an