1

Name

Class

Subject

Date

Abortion Rights in the United States

Introduction

The history of abortion in the United States is made of great upheavals, from the
tolerance of the 19th century to its prohibition, from the judgment of Roe v. Wade who tore
America apart with feminist victories. A political issue for 50 years, abortion is still a subject that
divides America in two.
Tolerance for unions outside marriage
Abortion was advertised in newspapers as early as the 1800s, and although it was illegal
at the time, it was not widely practised. The majority of women who have undergone abortions
have done so as a result of an unplanned pregnancy. However, when women gained more
independence in the 1880s, they began to have fewer children. Abortion became very taboo at
this era. Over the course of a century, it was restricted and finally outright banned over the
majority of the country.
Roe v. Wade
Abortion is back in the spotlight after decades of obscurity, owing to the efforts of Norma
McCorvey and her legal team. Norma McCorvey, now 21 and pregnant for the third time, sues
the state of Texas, where abortion is illegal, using the pseudonym Jane Roe. During this trial, the
presidential election of 1972 becomes a point of contention for Democrats and Republicans. Roe
v. Wade, the historic decision of the American Supreme Court, was handed down on January 22,
1973. Abortion becomes a constitutional right as a result of this amendment.
A division that Norma McCorvey alone embodies. She has allowed millions of American
women to abort without risking their lives but was unable to abort herself, the judgment having
been rendered several years after her pregnancy. She converted to Catholicism and became a
staunch anti-abortion activist. A fight that has been on the rise since the end of the 1980s.
Ethical issue
One of the main thrust of the abortion debate concerns a particularly delicate ethical
issue: Can you resort to deception for a completely moral purpose? The question of the attitude
towards the principle "the end justifies the means" arose in connection with the fact that a whole
 2

network of "problem pregnancy" clinics appeared in the country. In advertisements, these clinics
appear to offer their services to women seeking an abortion. In fact, their goal is to prevent
termination of pregnancy: they do not perform abortions at all, even in cases of rape, incest or a
threat to the woman's health. To achieve their goal, patients are usually intimidated with images
of bloody embryos thrown into the trash can, and distorted statistics of complications with
modern methods of abortion.
Supporters of the prohibition of abortions believe that in order to preserve the life of an
unborn child, it is worth somewhat deviating from the norms of impeccable morality and
resorting to deception (besides, in such clinics they do without outright lies - no one will tell you
directly that abortions are being performed here); refer to the fact that in certain historical
situations, deception deserves approval (for example, when it was used to transport fugitive
slaves to the North before the civil war in the United States or to save Jews from the Nazis in
Europe). In addition, the activities of such clinics are tried to be justified as a necessary
counterbalance to what the abortion establishments are doing, since only a few of these
establishments can provide balanced advice to a pregnant woman (Jones, 214).
Opponents of the tactics used in the clinics of "problem pregnancy" point out that the
latter, by misleading the patient and delaying the moment when she gets to the clinic where she
can have an abortion, actually put her health at risk, since abortion is the least dangerous on the
earliest stages of pregnancy. In addition, many see attempts to deter a woman from abortion by
intimidation and deception as a special form of coercion that restricts freedom of choice.
Advocates of the right to abortion
As a general rule, pro-abortion proponents believe that the government should not
become involved in women's personal decisions about abortion. In their opinion, every woman
should be given the option of having an abortion or not; nevertheless, the availability of this
choice does not obligate anybody to choose a certain course of action. Furthermore, no one is
forced by law to put their health at risk, and in the meanwhile, with the total restriction of
abortion, many pregnant women would be subjected to the hazards of having a foetus and
delivery, as well as illegal abortion, as described before.
Finally, opponents of the prohibition on abortion fear that if the government is allowed to
impose restrictions to ensure the right to life of every zygote or every embryo, then it may come
to the compulsory regulation of the lifestyle of pregnant women. Someone will demand, for
example, to prohibit them from smoking, drinking alcohol or strenuous physical work on the
grounds that all this could pose a risk to the health of the developing fetus, and thus to the
"potential human personality".
Many of those who have taken a liberal position on abortion see some degree of
hypocrisy in the philosophy of their opponents. For example, "liberals" ask: if "every child born
will be desirable for someone," why then tens of thousands of children (for example, with
congenital anomalies or chronic diseases) were not adopted by those who insist on the
prohibition of abortion? And why do the "prohibitors" seem to be more concerned with
protecting the unborn living beings than with the need to improve the socio-economic situation
 3

of the mass of impoverished people already born in this world? Another argument advanced in
support of the liberal position is that an aborted (artificially or spontaneously) fetus is not subject
to baptism or Christian burial (Jones, 217).
On some issues, the "liberals" disagree. Sometimes they are confused by the proposal to
allow abortion in cases of congenital anomalies, including genetic ones, since it is not clear
where to draw the dividing line. When the fetus does not develop a brain at all, there can hardly
be doubts about the justification of abortion; but what if, for example, only a certain amount of
mental disability can be expected without severe physical impairment? Should a pregnancy be
terminated if the birth defect allows you to live a long life, but it will be burdened by the disease?
There is also controversy over the question of at what stages of pregnancy it is still
possible to carry out abortions. Most "liberals" consider the end of the 2nd trimester to be the
approximate limit, except in special circumstances (when, for example, in the 3rd trimester, there
is a threat to the mother's life). However, some question the permissibility of abortion after the
end of the 1st trimester, while others believe that there should be no time limit (Beckman, 107).
Concluding remarks
When it comes to abortion, there seem to be three primary points of view. Abortion
opponents who feel the state should not promote embryo or foetal deaths by authorising
termination of pregnancy are at one extreme. Supporters of "life preservation" want all abortions
prohibited. Opponents of abortion restrictions call themselves "free choice" proponents and
argue that the law should not restrict a pregnant woman's right to choose whether or not to have
an abortion. Abortion opponents who think it should only be used in extreme circumstances
(such as when the pregnancy is harmful to the mother's health or is the consequence of rape or
incest) and proponents who feel it should not be the primary method of birth control share an in-
between attitude. The Catholic Church lends its support primarily to the anti-abortion movement,
which is strongly organised and politically engaged. Orthodox Jews, Orthodox Christians, certain
atheists, and conservative Protestants all hold this view. There are four key reasons in favour of
this approach, according to (Beckman, 111):
1. The right to life belongs to every human being, including unborn children.
2. Taking the life of another human being is a heinous act that has no place in human
society.
3. The beginning of human existence occurs at conception.
4. Abortion at any stage of pregnancy is a crime against humanity since it results in the
death of an unborn child.
Even those who reject these reasons as unpersuasive agree with former president Ronald
Reagan's logic: "If we don't know [when an individual's life starts], isn't it better to presume it's
already begun? ". Because it's impossible to tell whether or not he's still alive, you'll treat him as
such until it's shown otherwise. The same logic applies when considering whether or not to allow
abortion.
 4

Works cited

Beckman, Linda J. "Abortion in the United States: The continuing controversy." Feminism &
Psychology 27.1 (2017): 101-113.
Jones, Rachel K., Meghan Ingerick, and Jenna Jerman. "Differences in abortion service delivery
in hostile, middle-ground, and supportive states in 2014." Women's Health Issues 28.3
(2018): 212-218.