An Argument in Favor of Abortion Supporting a Womans Right to Freedom

Forty years after the Supreme Court legalized abortion in its landmark Roe v. Wade decision, the controversial issue continues be a battle nationwide. Republicans who support anti-abortion controlling the White House and Congress have women around the world worrying about their legal right to the procedure. People that oppose abortion are optimistic that their years of long hard work to limit the procedure or to overturn Roe v. Wade could come to fruition. Other observers aren’t so sure that the court would overturn Roe v. Wade. Public support for abortion is as high as it has been in two decades. A Pew poll in October 2016 found that 59 percent of Americans believed such procedure should be legal in all or most cases while 37 percent said it should be illegal. (Bara, 2017) Pro-life activists believe that life begins at fertilization and is morally unacceptable to obtain the procedure no matter the circumstances. While pro-choice activists support that women have a moral right to decide what to do with their bodies. Banning abortions can lead to women putting their physical and mental health at risk. Although, many view the method as morally wrong, majority of the people see the benefits in legalizing abortion at all stages of pregnancy. By the federal government minimizing the restrictions on abortions will not only help minimize serious health risks for women, but it will also help alleviate government spending in other areas.

First, Congress needs to rethink this dangerous attempt to impose a nationwide ban on terminating a pregnancy at 20 weeks of gestation. Not only is it an attempt to restrict women’s access to safe and legal abortions, but in many cases the procedure is needed later in pregnancy because of very complex circumstances. For example, severe fetal abnormalities and serious risks to the woman’s health are not diagnosed until after the 20-week mark. Scientific reviews have found that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester of pregnancy (Wahwiak, 2018). Such circumstances should be between the doctor and the woman to make such a decision to have the procedure performed especially if the woman’s health is in jeopardy.

Second, all state administrations should help support women by allowing those that have been a victim of rape or incest have a choice of having an expedited abortion. In many states there is a waiting period after the initial visit that varies from 24-72 hours for a woman seeking an abortion. In high hopes that women would reconsider getting the procedure done. Such barriers hinder a woman’s ability to obtain a timely termination. It can not only delay the process but such circumstances can really affect them mentally as they have just gone through such a traumatic experience, and can lead women to look outside the medical system to terminate their pregnancies.

Third, the federal government should reinstate funding to abortion clinics. Many state agencies have ordered to end all payments to medical practices that are affiliated with abortion clinics altogether. Ending disbursements have resulted in putting women’s health at serious risk. For example, Planned Parenthood. Planned parenthood is the nation’s largest abortion provider. (Valda, 2017) President Trump signed a presidential memorandum reinstating the Mexico City policy, which blocks U.S. funds from going to any global nongovernment organization that provides abortion counseling. (Valda, 2017). The Congressional Budget Office’s bottom line is that as many as 650,00 women mainly in low income communities are now without or will lose some sort of access to care.

Fourth, state legislatures should allow abortions in all fifty states without any restrictions and make sure the procedure is covered by government programs. Restrictions on abortions fall hardest on women who are more likely to be in poverty. These women who already are disadvantaged face difficulties such as, lack of access to information and services necessary to prevent unplanned pregnancies in the first place. Low-income women are more likely to face unintended pregnancies. In 2008, the rate of unintended pregnancies among poor women was more than five times that of women with an income at least 200 percent of the federal poverty level. (Boonstra, 2014) Some abortions restrictions such as the Hyde Amendment, which harshly limits abortion coverage for women who rely Medicaid specifically target low-income women. Regulations that restrict access to such procedures may result in worsened economic outcomes.

Lastly, state legislatures should support abortions to help decrease the amount of government spending in other areas. For example, restrictions on unwanted pregnancies make it costlier- financially in terms of woman’s health and safety. Congressional Budget Office’s states that permanent defunding would increase federal spending by $130 million over a 10-year period. Most of the increase would be result of thousands of unwanted births needing to be covered by Medicaid, as well as coverage for the children’s health care. Not only will funding increase for healthcare but because majority of the women seeking abortions have Medicaid as their primary insurance, this lets us know that these women will be seeking other government assistance programs to help support their families.

In conclusion, the government funding abortion clinics can be beneficial for women’s health, safety and the economic growth of our country. The right to medical abortions can substantially improve women’s access to safe unwanted pregnancies. Thereby, reducing the incidence of unsafe pregnancies. By removing such firm barriers to the treatment, the government can ensure that women have access to medical abortion in a safe and a hygienic setting.

Cite this page