The Supreme Court Case Roe V. Wade

The “Planned Parenthood Federation of America” is a non profit organization, funded by the Federal Government, in which it provides reproductive/maternal health services among the United States as well as internationally, since 1952. In recent news developments, there have been rumors that Planned Parenthood practices “inhumane” procedures when aborting an unborn baby to harvest their organs and that a law should be passed to stop this. The supporters for Planned Parenthood claim that these claims are unfounded and believe that Planned Parenthood is a wonderful association that helps women and men all around the world. This issue has caused a series of debates that have been going on for years, but Planned Parenthood still lives on.

First I will like to discuss the effect this decision made on an organization. It is important, because this organization is a large vehicle to the effort of birth control. Planned Parenthood, is an organization which offer its services to help family control pregnancies, counsels young woman on abortion, and it 's a lead voice in protection of the body of the female over the offspring. I will continue with Planned Parenthood expansion, while I explained the consequences of the precedent established by Griswold v. Connecticut in subsequent landmark cases.

Planned Parenthood is a controversial topic sweeping the nation of America with political and moral issues. Every day one could come across a new article on it, stubble upon a news article in their local paper or even on their local news station. Planned Parenthood directly provides reproductive health services, is involved in teach young students about sexual education, contributes to research in reproductive technology, and interacts with legal and political efforts aimed at protecting and developing reproductive rights.

The research that I chose to elaborate my topic on is the Roe v. Wade court case which is about abortion. The case history is about a woman who was single and pregnant; she decided to bring a stimulating challenge suit to the constitution of Texas laws. The laws that Texas made were given to prohibit mothers from aborting children because it was a crime. They could not do it without medical advice for the reason that it was to save the life of the unborn child. As I begin to go into detail about the court case. First Dr. Hallford, a medical doctor who faced criminal prosecution for violating the state abortion law. Second, you have the Does. They are a married couple with no children who were against Jane Roe and her decisions. Lastly, you have District Attorney Wade. Roe and Hallford had a portion of controversies and declaratory that was warranted. The court ruled a decision relief that was not warranted and the Does criticism was not justiciable. This is a brief synopsis of what the court case will expand on later on in the research paper. I will be utilizing reviews to test what male and female dispositions were towards fetus removal and how they feel about it. The study will extremely differ and I will be getting a broad gender preference perspective of the subject that I decided to do the review on. It will all tie once again into the Roe v. Wade court case. As you are perusing my examination paper; the researcher made an investigation on Chowan University

Planned Parenthood is an organization that provides healthcare and education to both men and women, having over 650 health centers that provide healthcare to countless communities around the world. Shockingly, 78% of those who use Planned Parenthoods services live at or below 150% of the federal poverty line, showing how important this organization is to low-income families (Topulos, Greene, Drazen). Their mission statement is “A Reason for Being”, which is shown through their efforts to provide health care, advocate public policies, create educational programs, and endorse research. There are those who do not believe Planned Parenthood should be funded by the government, though, due to the fact that they provide abortions to women in need. Studies show that the effects of not having Planned Parenthood available are disastrous, causing low-income families to lack a healthcare provider and the number of those who are infected with STD’s and STI’s to rise. The biggest concern communities have about the government defunding Planned Parenthood is the effects that it would have on low-income families who would no longer have access to something that many people take for granted: health care. Although many believe that Planned Parenthood mostly provides abortions, in reality, only 3% of the people that seek help from them receive an abortion, while 97% receive affordable and, in many cases,

Millions of women across America will struggle to receive the medical attention they need if the federal government stops funding to Planned Parenthood. Every year 363 million dollars goes into the funding “pot” collectively at Planned Parenthood’s nationwide (Clark 5). This money is used predominantly by women; for six in ten women, Planned Parenthood acts as their main source of health care (Clark 4). Many individuals with low incomes depend on these clinics to maintain or help better their health. Recently, the federal government is trying to pass the Pence Amendment, which would eliminate funding to these institutions. The federal government needs to realize how important Planned Parenthood

Affordable reproductive health care is hard to find for low-income women, and many people feel that without Planned Parenthood women will have no care at all. Another problem according to the article “Planned Parenthood and the Next Generation of Feminist Activists”, the younger generation Americans do not “want to be labeled. They don’t like being singularly defined by their political party, or their sexual orientation, or their views on abortion” (Laguens 188). The younger generation simply do not want to identify as “pro-choice” or

Five years ago, we learned in Texas what can happen when efforts to defund Planned Parenthood are carried out. The network of health-care providers falls apart and women lose access to essential preventive services. Planned Parenthood is not something that, at first, was affecting Texas government. When Texas decided to focus on the fact that they preform abortions, basically, just ignoring the fact the government started by providing reproductive health care and still do. That’s when Planned Parenthood was forced to fight back, which started to affect Texas government because of their involvement. Years ago, Texas voluntarily gave up $30 million a year in federal funding for women’s health programs, just so it could exclude Planned Parenthood from the roster of approved

Leaked videos from Planned Parenthood have caused frenzy among Americans and there have been debates on whether or not to continue funding this organization. These videos reveal Planned Parenthood officials discussing selling fetal tissue for profit. While they are proved to be edited videos, many people are still wary about the whole situation. Joining along with this frenzy is Ruth Marcus, whose article, Defunding Planned Parenthood would actually increase abortions, argues why Planned Parenthood should still be funded. Marcus provides substantial evidence including pathos and logos to support her claim; however, it is her ethos that is questionable. With numerous fallacies plaguing her argument, her ethos is damaged, thus affecting the argument’s

After researching both sides of the debate on the acceptability of the US Government funding Planned Parenthood, I have affirmed my initial support for government funding. The evidence that assured my support revolved around the consequences defunding Planned Parenthood would cause and the general lack of empirical evidence against Planned Parenthood. The majority of the opposition object to funding planned parenthood for moral and religious reasons. Overall, I feel more damage would be done by defunding the organization.

A key argument that has been propagated by the opponents of Planned Parenthood’s continued funding and government support is that the money spent on it could be used on other community health facilities. The caseload and the large number of patients make it difficult for community health centers to provide the services efficiently. The situation in Texas presents a good case study for analysis of the effects. The state cut Planned Parenthood out of its family planning networks in 2013. They started excluding Planned Parenthood from its network of clinics where women from low-income communities got STI screening, contraception, and other reproductive health services (Muchmore 2015). The state has a significant focus on abortion restrictions and the decision to defund the Planned Parenthood federation. The other clinics available in the areas argued that they could take care of the workload if Planned Parenthood stopped and they would only have to increase their capacity.

About a century ago, a small birth-control clinic was opened by Margaret Sanger in Brooklyn, New York. Women and families travelled to this clinic to learn about contraceptives and the perils of self-administered abortions. This was unheard of at the time, to teach a woman how to stop pregnancy in a world where the highest aspiration of a woman was supposed to become a mother. However, very soon after this clinic opened, Sanger was put incarcerated for illegally distributing contraceptives. This clinic would become known as Planned Parenthood, the leader in promoting sexual health in the United States. Despite the essentialness of Planned Parenthood, many conservatives in the government

Many controversial debates concerning Planned Parenthood and an exceeding amount of government funding to the organization are occurring in today’s news. A recent case in particular that caught the eye of many who weren't yet aware of the deliberation was when President Trump decided to sign an executive order on January 23, 2017 concerning the defunding of Planned Parenthood (Richardson). Not only did he sign this policy surrounded by seven privileged white men, but he signed it two days after the largest peaceful protest in U.S. history: The Women’s March. This matter does not only concern women, but it concerns men and children as well. As an organization, Planned Parenthood provides affordable

When the name, “Planned Parenthood”, comes into conversation, the first thing to come to one’s mind it simply: abortion. The current controversy is that Planned Parenthood should not be funded by the government because its use of money to the perspective of the public eye. Because the company is so highly associated with abortions, taxpayers bring up the fact that the government should not be funding companies like Planned Parenthood due to their affiliation with the medical fields including abortion. However, Planned Parenthood should continue to receive funding because despite getting government aid, the establishment is so much more.

In this political speech by Barack Obama, the 44th president of the United States, he talks about planned parenthood and how it benefits women. Obama gave this speech that took on April 26, 2013. Obama goes over women's need for planned parenthood services, health care, and he briefly discussed the new law in North Dakota outlawing a woman's right to choose abortion “starting as early as six weeks, even if a woman is raped” (Remarks). One may pick up on Obama’s passion towards this topic through his knowledge, reasoning, and his research done behind the scenes that were presented to the reader when reading or listening to this speech.