An Analysis of Margaret Sanger’s “The Morality of Birth Control” At a time when the Women’s Rights Movement was beginning to take off in full force, Margaret Sanger her position on women’s rights of healthcare known. With the potential plans to defund Planned Parenthood, “The Morality of Birth Control” is as pertinent in women’s health today as it was then. Margaret Sanger argued that birth control did not compromise morality; she believed that American society was immoral in denying birth control information because it often led to unproductive citizens. Sanger was disappointed in society’s lack of appreciation and understand of women’s health and childbirth.
For example on page 53 it says, “ There was a time, shortly after the Bill of Life was passed, that Dumpsters such as that would be tempting to girls like her. Desperate girls who would leave unwanted newborns in the trash. It had become so common that it wasn’t even deemed newsworthy anymore- it had become just a part of life. Funny, but the Bill of Life was supposed to protect the sanctity of life. Instead it just made life cheap.
Man may have felt that she was being a sexist and the title was misleading because she focused on nonviolent crimes and the not overall "for anything" scenario. The article said 147,000 children with mother is in prison but how many fathers are in prison? If the prison can 't be closed down she want the expansion of prison to be slowed down by identifying women are needed in the community but if women have committed crimes, they aren 't going to better the community but harm it. O 'Brien concept of not incarcerating women for anything and shutting down women 's prison cannot be done and she wasn 't able to suggest with credibility that it will be a good idea for nonviolent crimes with evidence,
(page 71). This quote said by Aunt Harriet, demonstrates that women in Waknuk who give birth to more than three mutated children can be abandoned by their husbands despite the fact that both the wife and husband play an equal role for the birth of a child. The blame is put on the women for any disliked feature that the child has because of the fact that
In “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” by Peter Singer, he argues that if the money not spent on necessities of life were donated, “that money could be the difference between life and death for children in need.” He makes note of the fact that so much of our income is spent on things that are not essential to life, and that if we were to donate the money we did not have to spend, we would help many children in need. Singer gives many theoretical examples such as, a Brazilian woman giving away a child whom she knows is going to be killed, just to get $1,000 that she spent on a new TV. Another example would be, Bob having the choice between a train smashing his Bugatti or killing a kid who doesn’t hear the train, and Bob decides to save his car and not the kid. Singer states that although those actions may have seemed awful, we Americans do the same, just without having it directly in front of us like Bob and the Brazilian woman did.
The mainly discussion was if it is right for the surrogates to be selling their bodies and all the damage that comes with pregnancy. The women who sign up to carry a child for an unknown person are usually poor and do not have a choice. “Women who work as cyber-surrogates are getting paid, it’s true. But they also pay a heavy price”, says bioethicist Mariam C. Lynn.
As portrayed within Carl’s THINK Social Problems (2013), the topic of abortion has been in the spotlight in recent years. Many wonder, what economic, social, and cultural consequences would ensue if we limited abortion. For starters, there would be several economic repercussions. Columbia University has stated that the legalization of abortion has resulted in women, holistically, being less likely to live in a single household and has concluded that they are also less likely to live in poverty (Pop-Eleches, 2005). This can be substantiated by the fact that having to raise a child can cost anywhere from $9,000 to over $25,000 per year, and not having to pay that cost, if it is undesired, can lead individuals to utilize that money in other facets
They argue that a life can’t be bought. Several people also ruminate that the surrogate child will be affected since he /she may be affected due to thoughts of being different. The most persuasive arguments that the scholars came up with the motive of proving that surrogacy was bad was explaining the effects it would have on the surrogate mother and the negative effects on the women who became surrogate mothers because of economic problems. They say that this may be considered prostitution because poor women could be exploited.
There are still “feudal-era attitudes toward the sex of unborns and the women who carry them,” (Ostrovsky). A study from Ohio State University discovered “that women who chose not to learn their child’s sex may be more open to new experiences and combine egalitarian views about the roles of men and women in society with consciousness,” (“Pink”). This article goes in depth on . Including that expecting mothers who scored high on a test of parenting perfectionism, were more likely to have known the sex of their unborn baby (“Pink”). Ostrovsky admits in her article that most women are “terrified at the thought of having a daughter”.
The government creates legislation to hold these women back further economically; the policy changes the government puts in place creates a lack of resources, which makes the transition from prison life to “free life” more difficult for black women than it would be for other groups. An example of this legislation is the “Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996”, because it is harder for women with mental health or drug abuse issues to access this financial help. In order to receive benefits, one has to prove their sobriety, when, as mentioned earlier, the prison system fails to rehabilitate it’s drug abusers (Freudenberg). This leaves previously incarcerated black women feeling targeted and isolated. Prisons
Today more than four million American individuals rely on Title X and its services. Without Title X, over four million individuals will lost the affordable preventive health care they have. Doing away with Title X is also doing away with women 's rights, and a woman 's control over her own body. I know that many of you believe that doing away with federal funding for Planned Parenthood is for the best, but in actual reality it is probably one of the worst things you could do. Doing away with Title X would lead to more unintended pregnancies because women 's access to affordable birth control would be cut off.
You mentioned that mostly half of women of color received all the legal abortions. I just want to add some statistic that Davis explains on her article. During several years preceding the decriminalization of abortions in New York state, 80% of the illegal abortions were involved Black and Puerto Rican women. Also, just you said, immediately afterward, women of color received about 50% of the legal abortions. This is not because they have more freedom or reproductive rights than the white women, but it rather shows how miserable living and working condition they were in.
In the early 1900s, women’s health was non-existent. It was not taught in school, it was never spoken about in the media, and many women themselves had no knowledge about reproductive health. During this time it was common to see women with ten, fifteen, even twenty pregnancies throughout their lives. Men and women both were often unaware on how to plan or prevent a pregnancy and birth control was pronounced illegal. Consequently, this was also a period of high childbirth mortality, as well as a time where many women were dying due to self-induced or “back-alley” abortions.