The Historic Struggle of Life and Choice
In the pre-1800s, there was no definite rule of the land on the abortion; there was only civil law tradition of punishing abortion if abortion is done after the fetus was viable; the standard of whether the fetus was viable was “quickening”. After the quickening, women abort the fetus were charged less than the murder (Lecture Feb. 2; page 5). In the 1821-1841, the abortion providers were criminalized in the few state level, but still the commercialization of the abortion increased the accessibility to an abortion (page 6).
Later half of the nineteenth century is when the abortion matter became the urgent issues to the most states, due to the AMA’s efforts to criminalize abortion for both the patients …show more content…
Because of the Americans’ love for the word “choice” and the traditional American ideological fear of the government intervention, the pro-abortion groups adopted the frame of choice: women should be able to choose what is done to her body. They associated abortion with the right and the choice to refrain from reproduction for any reason; such tactic then allowed the pro-abortion groups to encompass the poor women who cannot afford reproduction (page 14). The language of choice has a link to the concept of the marketplace (ibid), and the rise of neoliberalism in the 1980s was perfect platform to …show more content…
Also, the pro-choice fronts put efforts to prove that the state laws set arbitrary and undue burdens to the abortion clinics under the name of medical standards; such laws, in the point of view of the pro-choice fronts, sugarcoat the poison pill of restricting the access to the abortion clinics. Such effort is shown in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellestedt. If the Supreme Court overturns the Texan regulation, then it is a step forward for the pro-choice fronts; however, if the Supreme Court confirms the constitutionality of the HB2, then the momentum is lost, and HB2’s ideological (evil?) twins would be legislated for states that wish to follow the footsteps of
In the pre-1800s, there was no definite rule of the land on the abortion; there was only civil law tradition of punishing abortion if abortion is done after the fetus was viable; the standard of whether the fetus was viable was “quickening”. After the quickening, women abort the fetus were charged less than the murder (Lecture Feb. 2; page 5). In the 1821-1841, the abortion providers were criminalized in the few state level, but still the commercialization of the abortion increased the accessibility to an abortion (page 6).
Later half of the nineteenth century is when the abortion matter became the urgent issues to the most states, due to the AMA’s efforts to criminalize abortion for both the patients …show more content…
Because of the Americans’ love for the word “choice” and the traditional American ideological fear of the government intervention, the pro-abortion groups adopted the frame of choice: women should be able to choose what is done to her body. They associated abortion with the right and the choice to refrain from reproduction for any reason; such tactic then allowed the pro-abortion groups to encompass the poor women who cannot afford reproduction (page 14). The language of choice has a link to the concept of the marketplace (ibid), and the rise of neoliberalism in the 1980s was perfect platform to …show more content…
Also, the pro-choice fronts put efforts to prove that the state laws set arbitrary and undue burdens to the abortion clinics under the name of medical standards; such laws, in the point of view of the pro-choice fronts, sugarcoat the poison pill of restricting the access to the abortion clinics. Such effort is shown in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellestedt. If the Supreme Court overturns the Texan regulation, then it is a step forward for the pro-choice fronts; however, if the Supreme Court confirms the constitutionality of the HB2, then the momentum is lost, and HB2’s ideological (evil?) twins would be legislated for states that wish to follow the footsteps of