David Orentlicher's Argument Against Abortion

Five minutes pass. Ten, twenty, finally thirty painful minutes have passed. You pick up the white testing stick. You look at the sign. It reads: “+.” Your heart drops. It was not your choice. You never chose to make new life, no, it was forced upon you when he forced you to make “love.” You are shaken, but it will be okay because you can receive an abortion. You drive to the clinic. You are denied an abortion. Why? They say you have a person inside of you. You explain that you were raped, that this was not your choice. You can already feel the unintentional pain bearing this child would bear. But it is not the clinic’s choice. It is the law. This could be the reality for all women in Tennessee, and any other state that passes fetal personhood laws. These laws dictate that a fetus is a person from the moment of conception (Star Tribune), not at birth. Under these laws, it would be near impossible for women to undergo an abortion, even in extreme cases such as rape, incest, or for health reasons. Not only that, but women with substance addictions who become pregnant could begin to be charged with homicide or child abuse if they …show more content…
The author David Orentlicher made the point that mothers are not required by law to donate an organ to their child, even if their child could not survive without the organ donation. The government would not force the mother to donate an organ, and the government would not be able to charge the mother with child neglect. Why would an abortion be any different? Bodily autonomy, the right to control the uses of one’s body, is a concept that should exist within our society. If a woman makes the personal choice that she is unfit to carry a fetus and raise a child, then the law should not strip her of her right to complete control over her own. Furthermore, the government should not be able to charge the woman for deciding not to care an unborn