Is Abortion A Violation Of Privacy?

In Judith Jarvis Thomson’s philosophy paper, A Defense of Abortion, she argues that abortion is permissible because an individual’s right over their own body outweighs a fetus’s right to life. In this paper I will focus on whether or not abortion is always permissible. First, I will present Thomson’s argument which says that abortion is sometimes permissible. I will do so by describing her “famous violinist” thought experiment. Next, I will object to Thomson’s claim and expand the scope of her argument by arguing that abortion is in fact, always permissible. I will do so by presenting a new thought experiment. Finally, I will conclude in saying that Thomson is correct and abortion is in fact only sometimes permissible.

In 1879, Connecticut passed a law that prohibited the use and education of contraceptives to both married and unmarried women, men, etc. Since this law was said to be seldom enforced, a Planned Parenthood in New Haven, Connecticut decided to take the risk. The executive director of Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, Estelle Griswold, and a doctor and professor at Yale Medical School, Dr. C. Lee Buxton, were arrested, found guilty, and fined $100 each (equivalent to about $750 U.S. today) for counseling a married couple about contraceptives and prescribing birth control to the wife. They appealed to the Supreme Court of Connecticut, where the Connecticut court upheld their conviction. Griswold and Buxton appealed to the Supreme Court of the

We live in a democracy. Every four years the people of America have the opportunity of voting for someone who best represents their political views and who they feel is best fit to run our country. Whoever is elected into office, has the power of implementing policies and regulations to help run the country smoother. Under the Obama administration, birth control is covered by all insurance companies with exceptions. However, under Trump 's administration they are making plans to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act that has the potential of not allowing full or partial coverage of birth control. This an issue that has plagued the woman’s community whose intentions of contractive use is not solely based off of the reason, to try and

The Birth Control Movement of 1912 in the United States had a significant impact on Women’s Reproductive Rights. Women in the 1800s would frequently die or have complications during or after childbirth. Even if the woman would have died, they would still have a great amount of children. As the years progressed into the 1900s, the amount of children being born dropped. Because of this, birth control supplements were banned, forcing women to have a child that she was not prepared for or did not want to have in the first place.

The battle for reproductive rights began well over a hundred years ago. At a time when families were producing more children than they could afford to feed, many women were seeking primitive forms of birth control and undergoing abortions. It was in the 1860s that a postal inspector turned politician named Anthony Comstock, in partnership with the Young Men’s Christian Association, set out on a crusade to condemn all forms of birth control and any kind of abortion by claiming they violated “anti-obscenity laws” (Baer). These men eventually succeeded and created the Comstock Laws in 1873 that prohibited all “sales, advertising, or information on birth control” (Baer).

Public discussions of birth control were criminalized under the Comstock Act of 1873 because people believed it was immoral. Margaret Sanger, who had opened the first birth control clinic in 1916 despite the Comstock Act of 1873, was a feminist and advocate. After serving prison time, Sanger returned publicly and illegally with drive to present a strong argument that defended the moral use of birth control. Prior to her morally controversial 1921 speech, Sanger was arrested in New York for her intent to advocate public knowledge pertaining to birth control. Although the ethical nature of using birth control is still controversial in America, Margaret Sanger’s 1921 speech “A Moral Necessity for Birth Control” was undoubtedly a catalyst for

On June 7th 1965, married couples in the State of Connecticut received the right to acquire and benefit from contraceptive devises. In a majority decision by the United States Supreme Court, seven out of the nine judges believed that sections 53-32 and 54-196 of the General Statues of Connecticut , violated the right of privacy guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The case set precedence by establishing marital (and later constitutional) privacy, and had notable influence on three later controversial ruling=s in Roe v. Wade (1973), Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) and Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) . The issue at hand was, and is still, one that still causes debate, wether a state has the

According to Supreme Court case Griswold v. Connecticut the United States Constitution protects women’s rights to use contraceptives. Our Constitutional heritage and principles contradict the verdict of that case. The general right to privacy that (has been said) is outlined in the Constitution, was used in the Supreme Court case to argue that decisions about a woman’s body is protected. Yet, nowhere in the Constitution does it mention the right to marital privacy. There are many flaws surrounding the verdict of Griswold v. Connecticut; not only constitutionally, but theologically and scientifically.

A U.S. citizen's "right to privacy" was first discussed in an 1890 Harvard Law Review article in which two Boston lawyers, Louis Brandeis and Samuel Warren, defined it as "the right to be let alone." Since then, the right to privacy has provided the basis for a stream of revolutionary and controversial constitutional interpretations by courts across the United States, culminating in the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. Although decisions have come down in favor of a right to privacy, they are largely based on a broad and disputed interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. With the plethora of privacy issues that confront courts and policymakers in the current information

Birth control has been a controversial topic since the 1960’s, when the pill arose on the scene and gained popularity. Men and women of certain religious faiths have sought to prevent other women from using birth control. However, most women want to be able to choose when the time is right for them to have a child. This is why birth control is essential, because it allows women and couples in general the freedom to choose and plan their families. In many cases the need to control women by controlling their access to birth control goes all the way to the federal government. The federal government determines what types of birth control are allowed on the market and who has access to them. Some Presidential administrations look more kindly

Estelle Griswold, the executive director of Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, and Dr. C. Lee Buxton, doctor and professor at Yale Medical School, were arrested and found guilty as accessories to providing illegal contraception. They were fined $100 each. They sued the state of Connecticut claiming it violated their constitutional rights. Their argument was that a married couple has a constitutional “right of privacy” They directly argued that- "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...nor deny any person the equal

Often times in today’s world we take certain luxuries for granted. The right to vote, the right of free speech, etc. But one of those luxuries that people often don’t consider is the right for women to use birth control. The Supreme Court case that argued for the use of contraceptives was Griswold vs Connecticut. The court case was argued March 29th-30th 1965, but was not decided until June 7th 1965. The case was on the debate of whether or not the use of contraceptives should be legalized. Griswold, the Executive and Medical Director of Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, was on the side arguing for the legalization of the use of contraceptives in a marriage. While the opposing side, the state of Connecticut statute, had forbidden the use of contraceptives since 1879.

In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) the United States Supreme Court affirmed that the first amendment and fourteenth amendment gave American citizens certain freedoms, such as the right to privacy. In turn, the Court struck down the Connecticut birth control ban, and forbade the government from making laws that interfere with the personal matters of married couples and their physician. However, more importantly, in the Court’s majority opinion, it relied on decided cases that used the Bill of Rights to validate the right of privacy even though this right is never explicitly written in the Constitution. Even so, the Griswold v. Connecticut decision has served as a precedent for other monumental cases like Roe v. Wade (1973), while upholding a

With repeated threats from Congress to defund Planned Parenthood and multiple states passing restrictive laws, reproductive rights—and abortion in particular—continue to be increasingly under attack in the United States. In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade that “a woman’s choice whether to have an abortion is protected by her right to privacy” and that any restrictions on that right must be under “strict scrutiny.” This means that by law, women have the right to get abortions without facing unnecessary restrictions. According to Roe v. Wade, the only time the government could enforce restrictions on this right was when there is a “compelling state interest” to do so.

Health care and what people are legally allowed to do with their bodies have created controversy galore throughout history. A particular point of debate is the topic of birth control and the government. A dangerous couple, it raises the question of who should have control over contraceptive laws and what controls involving them should be put in place? Currently, under the Obama Administration, the Affordable Care Act and “Obamacare” have been created. One of the sections of this new plan creates a mandate which requires private businesses to provide insurance that covers birth control costs. The government should not be able to force businesses, and therefore the American people, to pay for birth control via health insurance because it