In 1973, the Supreme Court made a ruling that stated that women were allowed access abortions in the first trimester of their pregnancy and sometimes in the second trimester, if there were physical health concerns (Roe v Wade). Several people have declared to be against this court decision and the right to abortion altogether. On the other hand, there are people who feel as if a woman has the sole right to decide whatever she deems fit for the situation. Society has separated into two differents sides: Pro-Life and Pro-Choice. Pro-Life advocates claim that allowing abortion would be unconstitutional because it infringes on the right to life. However, the pro-life movement itself disregards the woman who actually has to carry the child. In his
…show more content…
Wade). Women consider abortion for a variety of different reasons, which are too broad to be controlled by laws. Some argue that, “bans on abortion procedures interfere in the doctor-patient relationship and put legislators in the position of making medical decisions they are not competent to make” (Rothstein). There is only a certain group of people who should be able to influence what happens when a woman is contemplating a decision that is concerning something as life-changing as an unwanted pregnancy. These people include the woman, her doctor, and the people she chooses to confide in. A great amount of women claim that they are not ready for a child or cannot afford to have one. Despite the desire to illegalize abortion, the pro-life movement does not actually do much to help women or their children. Studies show that “Pro-life states are less likely than pro-choice states to provide adequate care to poor and needy children” (Borgmann). A pregnant woman is indefinitely left to decide whether or not abortion is the best decision for her. Likewise, when it comes to the argument of adoption, the woman still has the right to choose because it is her body being used. One woman argues that laws forcing a woman to go through a pregnancy unwillingly is a prime example of bodily intrusion. She also states that is comparable to forcing someone to give bone marrow to save a child (Borgmann). There are simply too many factors that go into the cases of abortion. The situations can be unique from each other and a woman should be able to deal with it, without government
Wade). Women consider abortion for a variety of different reasons, which are too broad to be controlled by laws. Some argue that, “bans on abortion procedures interfere in the doctor-patient relationship and put legislators in the position of making medical decisions they are not competent to make” (Rothstein). There is only a certain group of people who should be able to influence what happens when a woman is contemplating a decision that is concerning something as life-changing as an unwanted pregnancy. These people include the woman, her doctor, and the people she chooses to confide in. A great amount of women claim that they are not ready for a child or cannot afford to have one. Despite the desire to illegalize abortion, the pro-life movement does not actually do much to help women or their children. Studies show that “Pro-life states are less likely than pro-choice states to provide adequate care to poor and needy children” (Borgmann). A pregnant woman is indefinitely left to decide whether or not abortion is the best decision for her. Likewise, when it comes to the argument of adoption, the woman still has the right to choose because it is her body being used. One woman argues that laws forcing a woman to go through a pregnancy unwillingly is a prime example of bodily intrusion. She also states that is comparable to forcing someone to give bone marrow to save a child (Borgmann). There are simply too many factors that go into the cases of abortion. The situations can be unique from each other and a woman should be able to deal with it, without government