Abortion: Crime or Social Responsibility Essay Example

1820s, and by 1900 abortion was largely illegal in every state.

Some states did include provisions allowing for abortion in limited circumstances; generally with the purpose of protecting the woman's life or pregnancies related to rape or incest (Cauthen). This nationwide ban on abortion only lasted for a couple of decades. Roe vs. Wade is one of the most pivotal Supreme Court cases with regard to the abortion movement. By the end of the hearing, the courts decided that abortion was a constitutionally protected right of women and their right to privacy (Garlikov).

This decision laid the foundation for legal arguments and, even today, is still taken into consideration as a precedent of common law. Roe vs. Wade made it possible for any woman to receive an abortion at any time and for any reason, and women did just that. poorly concluded paragraph According to the figures from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, half of all abortions in the U. S. each year are performed on women under the age of 25, and one in five involves teenagers (Hausknecht). In the year 2006, there were 4 million childbirths in the United States, in the same year, there were more than 1. 37 million abortions performed (Hausknecht).

That’s approximately one abortion for every three births, and that’s not the most shocking statistic. An estimated 43% of all women will have at least one abortion by the time they are 45 years old and 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion (Hausknecht)! In today’s society, more women are delaying starting a family until they are in their thirties. This suggests that the

high number of abortions will remain high, and quite possibly increase, in coming years. Nearly a quarter of the women surveyed who have had an abortion say they opted for the procedure because they wanted to postpone motherhood (Hausknecht). The large majority of women who do choose to abort their pregnancies do so within the first 15 weeks, in fact, nearly 95 percent have the operation performed during that time period (Hausknecht). This leaves five percent of women still having an abortion 20 weeks and later from conception.

Five percent may not sound like a large statistic but when you consider it is nearly 68,500 women a year, it brings the issue back into perspective as to why a 24-week maximum is just not acceptable. Science has seen its fair share of advancements in recent years; cloning, stem cell research, cancer treatments, and most important to this topic of abortion, the ability to determine whether or not a fetus can sense pain. It was believed that a fetus had no pain receptors until late in the third trimester (Gibbs). This estimate of pain sensory has now been proven to be very wrong. There is substantial evidence that by the tenth week, unborn fetuses draw away from surgical instruments in a manner that an infant or an adult would. This reaction is now being interpreted as a response to pain (Willke).

This is scientifically documented in the movie “Silent Scream”. Silent Scream is a Real-time ultrasound videotape of a 12-week suction abortion procedure. It dramatically, but factually, shows the pre-born baby dodging the suction instrument time after time, while its heartbeat doubles in rate. When finally caught, its

body being dismembered, the baby’s mouth clearly opens wide (hence, the title). Director Rodger White of the Neurosurgery & Brain Research Institute at Western University said, "The fetus within this time frame of gestation, 20 weeks and beyond is fully capable of experiencing pain (Gibbs). Without doubt, partial-birth abortion is a dreadfully painful experience for any infant”.

This strong evidence is the very reason the partial-birth abortion ban act needs to be revised to limit the gestation period to 20 weeks, but not all individuals share this sentiment. There are two sides to any argument, and abortion is no different. Pro-life activists believe abortion is immoral, unethical and should be permanently banned from practice. On the polar opposite side of the debate, are the Pro-choice. These activists declare it is a women’s constitutionally protected right to do with her body as she pleases. Pro-choice individuals don’t necessarily promote abortion as a way of contraceptive but rather feel rules and restrictions shouldn’t govern their bodies.

Both sides have strong arguments that rely on a broad field of debate. Pro-life depend on the argument of ethics and moral decisions; aborting a baby may be legal as of now but is it the “right” thing to do? On the other hand, Pro-choice uses the argument of constitutional rights; it’s my body, my life (Garlikov). Not only do both these arguments sum up the debate on either side they also depict the political status of an individual. Typically persons who support Pro-life have an affinity for Republican stances; on the same note, Democrats usually support Pro-choice or the loosely restrictive laws that are in place now but have no intentions of

revising them. These are broad generalizations but typically hold true.

While discussing the topic of abortion law revision keeps in mind the staunch differences between the two groups debating over the topic. It will allow a more complete understanding as to why the law has yet to be changed, but at the same time why it is still moving in a pro-life direction. The most frequent kind of reform to the abortion law proposed as of late has been to lower the legal time limit. This is what individuals should understand; it is not just an idea that is needed. You must believe strongly enough to make a difference and take the appropriate actions to create the difference you want to see in the world. It’s not enough to support the cause; you need to take an active stance on the cause.

Oregonians need to unite and speak to their elected representatives and inform them through letters, petitions, protests, and debates as to how they can, and should, make a difference. In order to see a movement in office towards the lowering of the legally allotted time limit on abortion, the citizens need to propose an idea to local representatives (in this case regarding abortion). In order to get a bill passed, it must go through several stages of reform; a bill is written, passed through the Senate committee, then to the house for a majority vote, then to the president for a veto or acceptance to create and implement the new law. Of course, this is the simplest explanation of how a bill is passed, but in order to get this ban reformed, a bill must

be first drafted at the lowest of levels, the state level.

To do this, one must first know and understand who represents their state. Ron Wyden, Oregon’s federal democratic senator, has an extremely liberal voting record concerning abortion and related issues. He voted “no” on all acts attempting to prohibit partial-birth abortions (Gov). On the other hand, Gordon Smith, Oregon’s republican federal senator, has described himself as pro-life, and in 2003 he voted along party lines to pass the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (Gov).

Gordon Smith is the man that needs to be informed of the growing concern of his elected people. A petition is an easiest and most effective way to demonstrate concern toward a cause. Lowering the time allotted for partial-birth abortion would compliment a petition nicely. College campuses, political meetings, parks, fairgrounds; are various types of venues that one could potentially see a large number of supporters willing to sign a petition. Once a petition is signed by a substantial amount of people, it can be taken directly to Oregon’s republican federal senator, Gordon Smith.

Who will then draft a proposed law to go through the said democratic process above. Abortion is no longer an underground procedure done in back alleyways and dark basements. It sadly has become a fairly common procedure with which a large number of women take advantage of. This reality doesn’t change the fact that some individuals agree with abortion and some do not.

While these two sects defend their stances on a political battlefield there will never be a resolution let alone a compromise. The only way to gain ground on changing the partial-birthed abortion ban act is through a bill

proposal. This is how it was done in the past and it is the way progress will be seen in the future. Undoubtedly the debate on abortion will rage on and this humble proposal will quickly be forgotten but I hope at some point in this

Works Cited

1. Garlikov, Richard. Garlikov: Abortion Debate. June 2000. 25 May 2008 http://www.garlikov. com/abortion.html.
2. Gibbs, Nancy. Time: Can a Fetus Feel Pain. 6 December 2006. 27 May 2008 http://www. time. com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1566772,00.html.
3. Gov. United States Senator: Gordon Smith. 13 May 2008. 24 May 2008 http://gsmith. senate. gov/public/.
4. Gov. United States Senator: Ron Wyden. 28 April 2008. 25 May 2008 http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/.
5. Hausknecht, R. The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform: Abortion Act. 8 March 1998. 17 May 2008 http://www.abortionno. org/Resources/fastfacts.html.
6. Kauthen, Kenneth. Big Issue Ground: The Abortion Debate. 4 September 1997. 23 May 2008 http://www.bigissueground.com/philosophy/cauthen-abortiondebates.html.
7. Lee, Dr. Ellie. Abortion Issues Today. February 2002. 26 May 2008 http://www.kent.ac.uk/sspssr/research/papers/legalpro.pdf.
8. United States Congress. Find Law for Legal Professionals. 13 April 2003. 27 May 2008 http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/abortion/2003s3.html.
9. Willke, Dr. J. C. Abortion Facts: Fetal Pain. 9 June 2005. 27 May 2008 http://www.abortionfacts. com/fetal_development/fetal_pain. asp.