Mother's Right To Abortion example essay topic

Abortion: One of the Most Controversial Topics Today In the early American Colonies, English Common Law was adopted by the United States, which declared abortion forbidden. The procedure was ruled a misdemeanor if performed before quickening, which meant "feeling life", and a felony if performed after quickening. In the early 1800's, it was discovered that life begins at conception and not when the mother "feels life". Eighty-five percent of the states had laws that made all abortions a felony. Between the 1800's and today, many arguments have taken place regarding when life begins for a fetus and to what extent the mother has a right to terminate her pregnancy (Fast Facts: History of the U.S. Abortion Laws, 2003). There have been numerous attempts to change the current laws and / or add to them and the majority of these attempts have failed.

The most famous law of them all resulted from the case of Roe vs. Wade, is still in effect today and forms the basis for abortion laws and arguments. Important Court Cases One of the most important dates in abortion history is January 22, 1973. On this date, the Supreme Court struck down all state abortion laws and legalized abortion in all 50 states for the full nine months of pregnancy. A mother's right to abortion is known as the outcome of Roe vs. Wade and falls under a woman's right to privacy. More specifically, the court ruled that the government could restrict abortion access after the first trimester with laws intended to protect the woman's health. Also, late-term abortions need the approval of a licensed physician to judge the procedure necessary to protect the mother's health (Roe vs. Wade: The 1973 Supreme Court Decision on State Abortion Laws, 1973).

According to an article written by Michael W. McConnell, "the reasoning of Roe vs. Wade is an embarrassment to those who take constitutional law seriously, even to many scholars who heartily support the outcome of the case (p. 136)". The first reasoning behind the decision is based on the "right of privacy" and that it is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. But the right of privacy is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution, as many would agree. Connell says that judges have found at least the roots of that right in the First Amendment, Ninth Amendment, and the concept of guaranteed liberty in the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The second reasoning behind the Roe vs. Wade decision is in relation to when life actually begins. The court had ruled "when those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary... is not in a position to speculate as to the answer". Connell feels that we are left with a completely circular argument, whereas the Court has not officially stated when life begins. Still, there are people who honestly disagree about the question of when life begins. If no one actually knows when life begins, the courts can not form a basis for saying the legislature's answer is wrong (McConnell, 1998).

In 1976, the case of Planned Parenthood vs. Danforth declared that spousal and parental consent is unconstitutional (Fast Facts: History of the U.S. Abortion Laws, 2003). On the other hand, in 1992 during the case of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania vs. Casey, the court ruled that Pennsylvania could require a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion is performed, a woman must give her informed consent to the abortion, and a parent or guardian must be notified before an abortion on a woman who has not reached the age of 18. The court also struck down Pennsylvania law that required spousal notification and declared it unconstitutional. The case of Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services (1989) declared Missouri law, written in June 1986, was in fact constitutional. The law stated that human life began at conception, Missouri state property could not be used to conduct abortions, and "fetal viability assessment" could be required before late term abortions are performed. It also declared that "unborn children have protect able interests in life, health, and well-being".

Unborn children are to be provided with the same rights enjoyed by other persons under this Missouri Act (Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services, 1989). Rights granted to an unborn child is one of the strongest arguments among those who are pro-life. "A Defense of Abortion" by Judith Jarvis Thomson In 1971, Judith Jarvis Thomson, a philosopher, wrote a unique and well-known essay about her views on abortion. Unlike most people who are pro-choice advocates for a mother's rights, Thomson agrees that conception is the start of a life. But she states this is not the issue and instead she asks whether killing this life "unjustly" is morally wrong or not (Thomson, 1971). Thomson uses a well-known Violinist analogy to express the rights of a mother with respect to an unwanted pregnancy, or rape.

Imagine you had awoken in a hospital, not knowing how you got there, and found yourself attached to a violinist who will die if he is unplugged from your body. You are told that this violinist has a kidney disease that requires the use of someone else's kidneys to extract toxins from his blood for the next 9 months until he has recovered from this ailment. Thomson admits that you were kidnapped and unfairly attached to this violinist, but if you disconnect yourself from the violinist he will die. According to Thomson, it is morally permissible to detach yourself from the violinist. She goes on to say that the right to life does not give the right to use someone else's body to stay alive. Because the violinist is a person, he has the right to life, but this does not imply the right to use your body in order to stay alive.

If he had a right to use your body to stay alive, then that right to live could outweigh your right to determine what happens to your body. She adds that if you were to stay attached to the v, you would be going above and beyond your moral obligations. In an analogy to explain pregnancies in which the mother's life is at risk, Thomson asks the reader to consider a story about a boy and his mother who live in a tiny house. The boy is growing rapidly in this tiny house, but his life is not at risk, and the mother will eventually be crushed to death if she does not protect herself. The house belongs to the mother, and therefore symbolizes her body. Thomson understands if a third party refused to choose which life outweighs the other, but she adds that despite how innocent the child may be, the mother does have a right to decide if her life shall be kept at risk or to terminate the pregnancy (Thomson 1971).

Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice Those who are pro-life feel that the unborn fetus has a right to life, just as much as the mother. Many who are against abortion agree that a fetus alive at time of conception, and therefore terminating the life of this unborn human would be unjust. They feel that abortion is wrong, no matter what situation. Thompson feels that pro-life advocates have weak arguments as to why abortion is so wrong (Thomson, 1971). Other than the fact that the fetus is alive, and should not have this right to life taken away, there are many other situations that arise and force a person to decide what he / she would do in a specific situation. For example, according to pro-life advocates, a woman who has been raped and becomes pregnant should still carry through with the pregnancy.

Some people believe in looking for the good in negative situations and believe that fate will take its course. Maybe the woman was "blessed" with this child for a reason, and by terminating its life, we will never know what good could have potentially come from this heinous act. A woman who is raped can continue the pregnancy and raise the child with love and strong morals or give the baby up for adoption to a couple who could have biologically have children of their own. There are other options to abortion.

Those who are pro-choice can easily bring up certain risky situations in which an abortion may be necessary. To once again use rape as an example, those who are pro-choice feel that the pain of going through a pregnancy with a baby that was not conceived through an act of love is too much to handle. Many women would rather not follow through with giving birth to a child that is a product of rape, especially if the woman is married and already has a husband and a family. Another situation that may arise is when the health of the mother is in jeopardy. Pro-choice advocates feel that a mother should be able to terminate the baby's life in order to save her own. Thompson also agrees that the mother has the right to decide if her life shall be kept at risk or to terminate the pregnancy to save her life instead (Thomson, 1971).

Those who "sit on the fence", feel that abortion is wrong, but it would be acceptable as a last resort. For example, if a mother's health or life is in jeopardy, an abortion may be necessary in order to save the mother. Therefore, the abortion would be understandable or permissible. But on the other hand, if a mother was raped and her health is not in jeopardy, those who "sit on the fence" feel that there are other alternatives to rape. Other alternatives would include giving the baby up for adoption or even the morning-after pill, which is commonly used now. I personally am one of those people who "sit on the fence" when it comes to the topic of abortion.

I feel comfortable saying that I would never have an abortion, but I should really be saying that by choice I would never have an abortion. For instance, if I was to become pregnant right now I would find any way possible to make things work out and I would take care of my baby. If I am mature enough to have pre-marital relations with someone, than I should be mature enough to take responsibility for my actions and carry through with the pregnancy. I may or may not decide to put the baby up for adoption, but I personally feel that I'd rather put the baby up for adoption than have an abortion. What makes me one of those people who "sit on the fence" is that if my health was ever in jeopardy and I could not carry a baby to full term, I may consider having an abortion. But of course abortion would be a last resort, and certainly not an option that I would openly consider.

Overall, the issue of abortion could be debated for years, because everyone has their own opinions. Whether life is given to a fetus at conception, or whether partial-birth abortions should be banned, everyone is going to feel differently on certain situations. One of the first arguments that pro-choice advocates will say is "How do you know what you would do in that situation unless you were put in it?" And it is true. No one ever thinks that rape will happen to them, but if it did, your decision now and your decision at that time may be different.

Ultimately, should a woman have the right to choose between terminating her pregnancy and a potential life, or continuing with the pregnancy?

Bibliography

Fast Facts: History of U.S. Abortion Laws. (2003, January 21).
Fox News Channel Online. Retrieved February 12, 2005, from web friendly story/0, 3566,881, 00.
html McConnell, Michael M. (1998).
Roe vs. Wade at Twenty-Five: Still Legitimate. In R.M. Baird (Ed. ), The Ethics of Abortion: Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice (pp. 135-138). Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. Roe vs. Wade: The 1973 Supreme Court Decision on State Abortion Laws.
1973).
In R.M. Baird (Ed. ), The Ethics of Abortion: Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice (pp. 63-72). Thomson, Judith Jarvis. (1971).
A Defense of Abortion. In R.M. Baird (Ed. ), The Ethics of Abortion: Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice (pp. 241-256). Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services. (1989).