Some women believe abortions are giving them rights but having an abortion is not the only way. Adoption is a much better option over abortion. An unwanted or unplanned pregnancy can scare some. This leads many rushing into abortion looking for a “‘quick fix.’” The American Adoption Agency stated, “...for every 149 women who choose abortion, only one woman chooses adoption” (American Adoptions, Inc). The percentage of infants being put up for adoption has decreased from 90,000 in 1971 to 18,000 in 2007.
After women won the vote, the leader of the National Woman’s Party believed that woman needed an amendment to stop all discrimination based on sex. It was introduced by Alice Paul in Congress in 1923 and then re-introduced in several different ways every year until 1971. In 1972, the ERA was finally passed the House and Senate. At that time, it was given 10 year extension. However, in 1973, Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade activated a strong anti-feminist movement that opposed the goal of feminists who supported abortion rights and the ERA.
Roe vs. Wade first went through federal court, and then it was appealed to the Supreme Court. McCorvey believed Texas abortion law was unconstitutionally vague, and violated her right to privacy. She also wanted to obtain an injunction to prevent Wade from enforcing the law, but it was never issued (“Roe v. Wade” par. 2). McCorvey and her attorneys relied on precedents such as Griswold v. Connecticut and Eisenstadt v. Baird, as well as important constitutional amendments to win the
In my paper I am discussing the debate of abortion in terms of induced, which is the intentional termination of pregnancy through drugs or surgery, and therapeutic, that is the abortion performed to preserve the life and health of the mother. In this paper, I take a strong stance against the acceptance of abortion both legally and socially. The main arguments used against pro-life (support for the abolishment of abortion), is based on the valuing of life. To those who are pro-choice (liberals, etc. ), argue that it is the woman’s choice to decide whether or not to have an abortion based on the grounds of valuing her life.
According to the WHO, there are an estimated 40-50 million abortions every year around the globe. The dictionary definition for abortion is ‘the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy’, and people usually very absolutist about their stances regarding this topic. The two sides of the argument are those who are pro-choice or pro-life. The pro-choice side argue that it is the free will of the parent/s to decide on how to handle the pregnancy as unplanned pregnancies could mean a detrimental life for both the parent/s and the baby as the parent/s may not have the resources to support and take care of the baby, or are not ready for such big change and responsibility. On the other hand, the pro-life side argue that life begins at conception
An article by Susan Markens found that in most cases genetic counselors attempt to remain neutral in presenting patient with the data available on risks and benefits. However, the very idea of genetic testing can be seen as suggestive or as a recommendation for abortion. In the case of Nancy, the patient has the right to all the information available on the risks associated with a fetus with Down Syndrome in order to make an information decision. However, the ultimate decision is hers and should not be urged by the
Thompson states, “I am arguing for the permissibility of abortion in some cases, I am not arguing for the right to secure the death of the unborn child” (335). In a famous scenario of Thompson, she refers to a woman being forced to provide nutrients and support to a famous violinist for nine months as they are connected by a tube. At the end of the nine months, she can go back to her normal life. Thompson refers to this scenario in support of abortion in cases of rape because the women is being forced to care
Argumentative Analysis of Abortion Rights Abortion is a controversial topic and people have debated between “Pro-Choice”, a woman’s right to choose, as well as “Pro-Life”, strictly anti-abortion, for decades. For Abortion Rights Action Week, a Harvard College newspaper printed an opinion-based article by Tanya Luhrmann called, The Pro-Choice Argument. She claims that a priceless part of a human life is experiencing motherhood. Based on Luhrmann’s research, she presents a strongly reasoned argument between “Pro-Choice” and “Pro-Life”, and how the perspectives of both sides affects the irreplaceable relationship of a mother and child. Her well-developed and valid premise holds value and presents a strongly reasoned argument, backed by extensive research she conducted.
Today, abortion still one of the most controversial topics in our communities, some with the Idea that it's wrong (pro-life) and others that is totally okay that women should have control over their body (pro-choice). Even though, it became legal in 1973, there are a big amount of people opposing abortion as a moral wrong. In this paper I would like to talk about three different theories on abortion. First, the structural functionalist, second the conflict perspective theory and third the symbolic Interaction theory. A structural-functional approach that it should be possible for a pregnant woman to obtain a legal abortion in specific circumstances.
In 1973, abortion became legal in the United States through the well-known court case of Roe vs Wade. Jane Roe was a pregnant and single woman who filed a lawsuit against a Dallas Country District Attorney, Henry Wade, in a federal court in Texas. She argued that she had a right to terminate her pregnancy in a safe medical environment even if her life was not in danger. The court ruled in her favor, saying that the constitution protects an individual’s “zone of privacy”, and that the zone was wide enough to include a woman 's choice whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. Since 1973, millions of abortions have been performed, yet the controversy over whether it should have been legalized is still argued by countless individuals today.
A recent federal lawsuit has been filed by the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) challenging the constitutionality of three provisions of the Setonia’s Abortion Laws. The three provisions ACLU are challenging are as follows (McCauliff): • Law which prevents state health officials from renewing or issuing licenses to abortion clinics located with 2000 feet of an elementary school (McCauliff). • Law which requires physicians performing abortions to complete 10 hours annually of continuing medical education on abortion procedures (McCauliff). • Law which requires abortion providers to give every patient a copy of her medical records, regardless of whether the patient requests such records (McCauliff).
The laws in the 1970’s are very different from the ones we follow today. In the 1970’s in Texas, it was illegal for a woman to have an abortion except when the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother. McCorvey/Roe could not afford to travel to another state to get a legal abortion. Norma McCorvey sued for a violation of her rights and other mothers in a similar situation. She sued for a violation of her right to privacy, which is protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
The first case I researched that influenced American society was the Roe v. Wade case. Roe v. Wade ruled unconstitutional a state law that banned abortions except to save the life of the mother. In 1973 when this ruling was made, many states restricted and prohibited the practice of abortion. In 1970 "Jane Roe" (Norma McCorvey) filed a lawsuit against the state of Texas which criminalized abortions. Ms Roe claimed the law violated her constitutional right to terminate her pregnancy in a safe environment because she could not afford to travel to a state where it was permitted.
This is the key Supreme Court ruling I have selected to analyze. The law being challenged was about the decision by women to have abortion without the interference from politicians. The case was held on January 22, 1973 by the Supreme Court where it handed down its landmark decision in the case of Roe v. Wade. The court recognized the constitutional rights to a woman’s right to make her own personal medical decision. The government entity that was part of the case was the politicians (Joyce, 2013).