Professional Documents
Culture Documents
pt2 Essay
pt2 Essay
pt2 Essay
Elizabeth Klein
A.P. Seminar
12 December 2016
Imagine, a woman has just found out she is pregnant. The pregnancy is unexpected and
unwanted, and the woman is not prepared to have a child. She has two options: go through with
the pregnancy, or have an abortion. Faced with these prospects, the woman chooses the latter.
However, there are complications. Her preferred hospital is Catholic and refuses to perform the
abortion due to their religious affiliation. She drives out of her way to reach Planned
Parenthood, where she must pay for her abortion out of pocket because her insurance provider,
Medicaid, cannot cover it. Then finally, Planned Parenthood must give the woman an ultrasound
of the pregnancy she is about to terminate. These traumatic events never would have even
occurred if the womans employer had not refused to insure morning-after pills for their
employees. Each of these problems was supposed to have been prevented by the Supreme Court,
but is still occurring all over the country. For women to truly have reproductive rights, her
abortion should not be subject to the religious beliefs of others and should be better protected by
In 1973, the Supreme Court sided with Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade to determine that under
the Fourteenth Amendment, a womans right to privacy includes receiving an abortion in her
first trimester (U.S. Constitution; Roe v. Wade). After this case, a trimester framework was
set up to determine at which point in a womans pregnancy could the state intervene with her
Klein 2
right to an abortion (Roe v. Wade). After Planned Parenthood v. Casey, this framework was
replaced with the Undue Burden Standard (Planned Parenthood v. Casey). This guideline
declares that the state may pass no measures which place unreasonable obstacles in the way of
abortion (Planned Parenthood v. Casey). However, recent research shows that many states are
getting away with contravening these standards on the grounds of religion. This is because
religious affiliation is seen as a justifiable reason for placing burdens in the way of the
procedure. This is unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment and Undue Burden
Standard, yet these violations still present themselves at every phase of a womans abortion.
There are two particular regulations in particular that place limitations on a womans
abortion. The first is the Hyde Amendment. This law states that Medicaid, a federal insurance
program, cannot use federal funds to cover abortions except under extreme circumstances
(Halperin 4). It was proposed by Christian Representative Henry Hyde with the intent of
decreasing funds for the execution of...human lives (Grossu). However, this amendment
greatly affects low-income women enrolled in the program, because they are often not able to
afford abortions without coverage. A report conducted by the Center for Reproductive Rights
claims that because of the Hyde Amendment, 18-37% of women who would have obtained an
abortion if Medicaid funding were available continue their pregnancies to term (Halperin 14).
In other words, these women are forced to have babies they are not prepared for because the
government wants to discourage abortion. The second regulation is a series of laws in sixteen
states that force a woman to receive an ultrasound before terminating her pregnancy (Sanger
375). During these ultrasounds, women are invited to view a picture of the fetus they are about
to abort (Sanger 378). Nancy Keenan, the former president of N.A.R.A.L. Pro-Choice America,
Klein 3
states that these mandates are neither medically needed, nor [wanted] (Rachel Maddow
Discusses). In both the ultrasound statutes and the Hyde Amendment, pro-life legislators are
wrongfully attempting to make a woman comply with their own religious beliefs.
The main reason pro-life people support these regulations is because they align with their
religious beliefs, which reject abortion. However, this decision belongs only to women
considering this procedure. The Fourteenth Amendment states that every citizen of the country
is entitled to a right to privacy (U.S. Constitution). The Supreme Court acknowledged in Roe v.
Wade that abortion is protected by this right and should be between a woman and her doctor
(Roe v. Wade). The opinions of pro-life supporters do not have a right to interfere here, yet the
Hyde Amendment and the ultrasound statutes aim to involve these beliefs with a womans
control over her own body. They violate the Undue Burden Standard and breach a womans
right to privacy.
Another violation of these protections is found within the outcome of Burwell v. Hobby
Lobby Stores, Inc. In a 5-4 decision in favor of Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court decided that
private, for-profit companies do not have to insure certain contraceptives for their employees if
they have a religious opposition to them (Burwell v. Hobby Lobby). Hobby Lobby sued for their
right to oppose emergency contraceptive pills and IUDs. They claimed these contraceptives are
abortifacients, or drugs that cause abortion, and go against the stores staunch Christian beliefs
(Burwell v. Hobby Lobby). The decision of this case promotes the idea that someones personal
religious affiliation is more important than a womans access to basic medical resources. It
encourages religious involvement in a womans private reproductive choices and decreases her
A common claim from supporters of Hobby Lobby is that women can obtain these
contraceptives at places other than their workplace. While the basic principle of this idea holds
true, the issue lies within the financial aspect of the situation. Emergency contraceptive pills
commonly cost $50 (Ella Prices), and IUDs often exceed $600 when not insured (IUD;
Mirena Prices). Without coverage, many women could not afford to purchase these
contraceptives. The Hobby Lobby regulation places a large economic obstacle in the way of
abortion, thus transgressing the Undue Burden Standard. In addition, the rule breaches the
Fourteenth Amendment because it allows religious beliefs to come in the way of a womans
privacy.
The last of these violations is found within Catholic hospitals. A report published by the
American Civil Liberties Union and written by Julia Kaye explains that Catholic hospitals must
follow a set of religious mandates known as the Directives (7). The Directives do not permit
abortion if the fetus displays cardiac activity, so Catholic hospitals only perform abortions in
certain cases (10). The report details multiple stories where women were denied their access to
abortion, even when their life was at stake. In one example, Mindy Swank knew she was
experiencing a miscarriage, but her Catholic hospital refused to terminate the pregnancy until
five weeks later when she began severely hemorrhaging (8). In another, an anonymous woman
who was also experiencing vaginal bleeding due to a miscarriage was denied an abortion for
seven hours at a Catholic hospital while they checked for a fetal heartbeat (10). By the time they
began the abortion, the woman needed a blood transfusion (11). As the report explains, these
hospitals are validating the notion that religion...takes precedence over medical standards (5).
Klein 5
can go elsewhere to receive them. Yet due to pro-life backlash, one of the most common places
to receive this procedure has had to close many of its doors. After a controversial video surfaced
that supposedly depicted Planned Parenthood officials participating in the sale of fetal tissue, the
organization shut down many of its centers. In fact, five states have only one center left
(Morris). Women who seek abortions are rebutted from Catholic hospitals, but their main source
of reproductive services is facing closure because of allegations that have yet to be proven true
(Kurtzleben). Not only do the Directives of Catholic hospitals place undue burdens in a
womans path to an abortion, but the war against Planned Parenthood does as well. In addition
to violating this standard, it infringes upon a womans right to privacy by involving religious
The outcome of Planned Parenthood v. Casey was decided with the intent of further
elaborating on the ruling of Roe v. Wade. However, while this ruling states that no unnecessary
obstacles may be placed in a womans way to an abortion, the aforementioned examples prove
that the Undue Burden Standard is constantly being breached. They also display the intrusion of
religious beliefs into a womans reproductive rights. This interference is a direct violation of the
outcome of Roe v. Wade and the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees all people with an
undeniable right to privacy (U.S. Constitution). For these transgressions to be rectified, the
Undue Burden Standard must be verified. It should explicitly state that any attempt to
discourage abortion that uses religious affiliation as justification is still a violation of the
regulation. The reformed standard should note that religion should not supplant a womans right
to make her own choices about her body. It should also do more to protect the Fourteenth
Klein 6
Amendment, as the current form of the Undue Burden Standard does nothing to acknowledge the
importance of this addendum. It should be altered to better illustrate how imposing religious
beliefs on a womans abortion decreases her right of privacy for the procedure. If the Undue
Burden Standard is refined in these ways, it will better reflect the sentiments that both Planned
Parenthood v. Casey and Roe v. Wade originally intended to make. For women to have the
reproductive freedoms they are entitled to, the Undue Burden Standard must be revised. If this is
done, then the standard will better uphold the rights endowed to all citizens by the United States
Constitution.
Klein 7
Works Cited
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.. 573 U.S. ___ (2014). Supreme Court of the United
States.
2016.
Grossu, Arina. The Hyde Amendment Has Saved 2 Million Lives. Democrats Want to Kill It.
Halperin, Jinna, et al. Whose Choice? How the Hyde Amendment Harms Poor Women.
2016.
Accessed
28 Nov. 2016.
Kaye, Julia, et al. Health Care Denied. American Civil Liberties Union, May 2016,
Kurtzleben, Danielle. Planned Parenthood Investigations Find No Fetal Tissue Sales. NPR,
28
Maddow, Rachel. Rachel Maddow Discusses Roe v. Wade with Nancy Keenan. The Rachel
Morris, Alex. The War on Planned Parenthood. Rolling Stone, 16 Apr. 2016,
http://tinyurl.com/z5o489p.
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern PA v. Casey. 505 U.S. 833 (1992). Supreme Court of the
16 Nov. 2016.
Roe v. Wade. 410 U.S. 113 (1973). Supreme Court of the United States. Justia U.S. Supreme
Sanger, Carol. Seeing and Believing: Mandatory Ultrasound and the Path to a Protected