Roe v Wade (1973)
In January of 1973, another historic precedent was set regarding the abortion rights of women in the United States. At the time, Texas abortion laws insisted that the act of aborting a pregnancy was prohibited, lest a doctor could reasonably determine that the mother’s life was at stake if the pregnancy was continued, or if the conception was a result of rape or incestuous relations. Norma L. McCorvey, who went by the pseudonym of Jane Doe, sought to challenge this law as her third pregnancy came under way. She unsuccessfully alleged that it was due to a rape incident, and therefore pushed to have her case heard by higher courts (U.S. History). During this time period, many other states had quite restrictive laws surrounding …show more content…
When brought to the Supreme Court, the ultimate ruling was essentially that the law did violate individuals’ “zone of privacy.” This area of natural and inherent privacy includes matters such as the decision to use contraception, marriage rights, and so forth. This ambiguous term, which are not lacking in the government, was then considered to include reproductive rights within the zone of privacy. Griswold v Connecticut was instrumental in rationalizing the verdict. Moreover, it was determined that a prenatal entity was not yet considered a ‘person’ in legal terms, and therefore terminating a pregnancy would not actually be killing a person, and could not be punishable by law (PBS). With the help of medical professionals, a general consensus was reached stating that prenatal life, or a fetus, is technically viable – that is, able to live outside the womb no longer dependent on the mother – by the third trimester of a pregnancy, or at 24 weeks. An earlier removal of the fetus from the womb would likely result in an inability to perform basic functions, such as breathing due to incomplete development (Breborowicz). While the abortion rights following the first three months of pregnancy are not quite clear or consistent across states, Roe v Wade essentially mandated that within the first trimester, a woman is free to undergo an abortion and make that decision solely with her doctor, and …show more content…
Roe v Wade set a significant precedent in ensuring that a woman has the ability, and the agency to decide to terminate a pregnancy aligned with her own views. However, most recently Texas attempted to pass legislation that would greatly impede a woman’s ability to access facilities, and to undergo the medical procedure. In 2013, Texas House Bill 2 was passed which required clinics providing abortion services to also have admitting privileges, or the ability to admit their patients to a medical hospital within the surrounding 30 miles. In addition, the state would also prohibit any sort of abortion practice 20 weeks following fertilization, based on claimed studies indicating that fetuses are, at that point, capable of experiencing pain (Texas Legislature Online). The state took a stance that maintained they were in the interest of protecting the well being of the fetus. Therefore, this includes preventing any pain from being inflicted upon the fetus at 20 weeks following fertilization or later, hence a ban on abortion from this point on. At a glance, the stipulations regarding abortion facilities do not seem very restrictive. However, as soon as the law was passed, more than half of the abortion clinics open in Texas were forced to shut down, unable to adhere to the complicated requirements outlined by the
In January of 1973, another historic precedent was set regarding the abortion rights of women in the United States. At the time, Texas abortion laws insisted that the act of aborting a pregnancy was prohibited, lest a doctor could reasonably determine that the mother’s life was at stake if the pregnancy was continued, or if the conception was a result of rape or incestuous relations. Norma L. McCorvey, who went by the pseudonym of Jane Doe, sought to challenge this law as her third pregnancy came under way. She unsuccessfully alleged that it was due to a rape incident, and therefore pushed to have her case heard by higher courts (U.S. History). During this time period, many other states had quite restrictive laws surrounding …show more content…
When brought to the Supreme Court, the ultimate ruling was essentially that the law did violate individuals’ “zone of privacy.” This area of natural and inherent privacy includes matters such as the decision to use contraception, marriage rights, and so forth. This ambiguous term, which are not lacking in the government, was then considered to include reproductive rights within the zone of privacy. Griswold v Connecticut was instrumental in rationalizing the verdict. Moreover, it was determined that a prenatal entity was not yet considered a ‘person’ in legal terms, and therefore terminating a pregnancy would not actually be killing a person, and could not be punishable by law (PBS). With the help of medical professionals, a general consensus was reached stating that prenatal life, or a fetus, is technically viable – that is, able to live outside the womb no longer dependent on the mother – by the third trimester of a pregnancy, or at 24 weeks. An earlier removal of the fetus from the womb would likely result in an inability to perform basic functions, such as breathing due to incomplete development (Breborowicz). While the abortion rights following the first three months of pregnancy are not quite clear or consistent across states, Roe v Wade essentially mandated that within the first trimester, a woman is free to undergo an abortion and make that decision solely with her doctor, and …show more content…
Roe v Wade set a significant precedent in ensuring that a woman has the ability, and the agency to decide to terminate a pregnancy aligned with her own views. However, most recently Texas attempted to pass legislation that would greatly impede a woman’s ability to access facilities, and to undergo the medical procedure. In 2013, Texas House Bill 2 was passed which required clinics providing abortion services to also have admitting privileges, or the ability to admit their patients to a medical hospital within the surrounding 30 miles. In addition, the state would also prohibit any sort of abortion practice 20 weeks following fertilization, based on claimed studies indicating that fetuses are, at that point, capable of experiencing pain (Texas Legislature Online). The state took a stance that maintained they were in the interest of protecting the well being of the fetus. Therefore, this includes preventing any pain from being inflicted upon the fetus at 20 weeks following fertilization or later, hence a ban on abortion from this point on. At a glance, the stipulations regarding abortion facilities do not seem very restrictive. However, as soon as the law was passed, more than half of the abortion clinics open in Texas were forced to shut down, unable to adhere to the complicated requirements outlined by the