Perspective on Abortion Rights

Imagine a woman faced with an unexpected and challenging pregnancy. She has to make
a difficult decision, evaluating her options and thinking about her future. Now imagine a society where that choice is taken away from her, and she is forced to carry the pregnancy to term, regardless of her personal circumstances. To truly understand the debate over abortion, one must first look at the deeply rooted arguments on both sides.Abortion has been a continuing issue for decades, with its history tied to debates about personal freedom, morality, and human rights. Supporters of abortion rights argue that individuals should have control over their bodies, believing that access to safe and legal abortion is necessary for equality and health.On the other hand, opponents view abortion as the taking of a human life, advocating for the rights of the unborn and pushing for alternatives like adoption.Despite the ongoing debate, understanding both perspectives is essential, as this issue affects individuals, families, and society as a whole.
Abortion is a safe medical procedure, and this safety extends to the use of medications.According to Sage journal:Abortion in legal, social and healthcare context, Jeanne Marecek, talked about a new abortion medication.
“The introduction in 2000 of medication that induce abortion offered new possibilities for abortion access.In the U.S, for example, medication abortion (which are also known as medical abortion or “pill abortion”) currently account for roughly %25 of abortions that are registered in medical records.”

When prescribed and took correctly under the guidance of healthcare professionals, these pills have been shown to be highly effective and safe for terminating early pregnancies.As stated by Planned ParentHood, “Medications for abortion are very safe.In fact, it’s safer than many other medicines like penicillin, tylenol and viagra.”
Research indicates that the risk of complications from medication abortions is minimal.Organizations like ParentHood affirm that when women have access to accurate information and appropriate medical care, medication abortion is not only safe but can be carried out in a private setting, which enhances comfort and privacy.Abortion pills have changed reproductive healthcare by offering a safe, non-invasive option under medical supervision, greatly lowering the risk of unsafe abortion.
The physical and psychological health risk, linked to abortion frequently goes unexamined, however, they provide significant reasons as to why the legality of abortion should be reevaluated. While proponents may argue that abortion is a safe procedure, cases show otherwise. For instance, Lorrain Thul, had an hysterectomy following an abortion puncturing her uterus organ in women’s lower abdomen where babies grow and develop. Severe infections and excessive blood loss from uterine punctures result in complications like increasing the risk of infertility which affects a woman’s ability to have or conceive children. Additionally, research on the psychological impacts of abortion reveal that many women experience feelings of regret, depression, and even anxiety following the procedure (Abraham, MD). This results in conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), where one has difficulty moving on in life since they’ll be reliving the distress through flashbacks, nightmares or unpleasant thoughts. Guilt and depression can cause one to feel hopeless in life leading to unhappiness, which can lead to social disengagement and isolating oneself. These symptoms of anxiety can disrupt sleep,

focus and emotional stability. Together, these mental health issues can affect the overall wellness and health of women. This implies that abortion has repercussions beyond the operation itself, highlighting the importance of women’s mental and physical health post abortion and why it should be taken into thought and consideration before legalizing abortion. As a way of prioritizing womens overall well-being.
A bioethicist quoted in Harvard Gazette,
“The ethical question of weather to support someone who says, “i’m pregnant and do not wish to be pregnant”involves the consideration of their body, the risk of pregnancy, and the rights of the individual.Many argue that forcing someone to carry a pregnancy to term, especially when they express a desire not to, places an undue burden on their physical and emotional well-being.”
In the Harvard Gazette it highlights this issue by making a comparison to organ donation, noting, “We don’t demand that people give blood or bone marrow”
Yet abortion restrictions effectively ask pregnant females to risk their health for another potential life.This perspective shows the importance of respecting an individual’s choice, especially when continuing a pregnancy might be risky or unwanted.It aligns with pro-choice arguments that emphasize personal autonomy and the medical realities of pregnancy.By focusing on these aspects, it shows the audience the need for personal freedom in making such significant decisions.
The ethical arguments against abortion are based on the idea that life begins at conception, the act of conceiving a child, which questions the morality of the procedure. In the case of partial-birth, late-term abortion procedure where the fetus is delivered before being terminated, congress finds the practice particularly disturbing, “The gruesome and inhumane

nature of partial-birth abortion and its disturbing similarity to the killing of newborn infant promotes a complete disregard for infant human life…” (U.S Congress). Society has a duty to protect life, as well as infants. This questions the significant moral and cultural consideration regarding the boundaries between life and death and the roles of medical professionals, who are entrusted with protecting life rather than ending it. This highlights the need to value human life and maintain moral principles during medical procedures. Additionally, “partial birth gives the fetus an autonomy which separates it from the right of the woman to choose treatments for her own body” (U.S Congress). Although decision making on one’s own body is an important ethical principle, it does not allow one to take another person’s well being into account. Just as laws are designed to protect people from harm done by others, society’s obligation to protect life should be extended to unborn children.
Pro-aborting laws focus on safeguarding a woman’s rights to choose, ensuring access to safe and legal abortion services as a fundamental aspect of reproductive rights.According to Gale opposing viewpoint:Abortion, talks about support for abortion.
“In 2024 pew research center poll, 63 percent of US adults believe that abortion should be legal in all or most cases,..some pro-life activist may condome abortions incase of rape or incest.”
This shows that abortion should be legal to protect individuals who become pregnant as a result of rape or incest, as forcing them to carry the pregnancy can cause additional trauma and suffering.Abortion should be legalized in all states because it ensures that women have access to safe medical procedures, reducing the risk of deaths and unsafe illegal abortion.
Significant modifications have been made to abortion regulations, especially in the United States. The Dobbs V. Jackson ruling of the supreme court invalidated the legality of

abortion under Roe v. Wade. The Dobbs ruling recognized the moral worth of life and allowed states to pass laws that prioritize the protection of fetal life. For instance, Dobbs upheld Mississippi Gestational Age Act, which prohibits abortion beyond 15 weeks and only allows it when the pregnant woman’s life is in danger or if there’s any serious fetal defects (Manninen BA). This law reflects a shift in policy, where Abortion is only allowed in order to protect one life whether it’s the mothers or the child’s life. Protecting fetal life at critical points in pregnancy, the Dobbs decision is in line with state objectives to prioritize the development and rights of the unborn, reinforcing a moral comment to valuing life from conception. Abortion violates the fundamental right to life, which everyone has. Abortion is a violation to the unborn child rights. This reinforces the need for a federal ban on abortion.
In conclusion, abortion is a complex topic that requires the balance of ethical consideration and personal autonomy. Advocates who support abortion support the idea of women’s right to autonomy over her body, emphasizing safe, legal access to abortion as being vital for equality and health. Conversely, advocates who are against abortion are pro-life. They defend the rights of the unborn and see abortion as an act of immorality. Overtime healthcare has improved making safe medications available, but there’s still concerns regarding the psychological and physical side effects of abortions regarding women’s health. Ultimately this debate affects both the people and society, therefore before making any decision on whether to legalize abortion or ban abortions the different aspects such as health, legality, ethical and moral should be taken into consideration while considering one’s personal preference and societal values.

Works Cited
Abortion in Legal, Social, and Healthcare Contexts – Jeanne Marecek, Catriona Macleod, Lesley Hoggart, 2017, journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0959353516689521. Accessed 29 Oct. 2024.
“Abortion Risks: LA Dept. of Health.” Abortion Risks | La Dept. of Health, ldh.la.gov/page/abortion-risks. Accessed 27 Oct. 2024.
Congress, U.S. “Partial-Birth Abortion Is Unethical and Should Be Banned.” The Ethics of Abortion, edited by Christine Watkins, Greenhaven Press, 2005. At Issue. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010012224/OVIC?u=cuny_ccny&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=70083 2f0. Accessed 27 Oct. 2024
Gazettebeckycoleman. “How a Bioethicist and Doctor Sees Abortion.” Harvard Gazette, 6 May 2022, news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2022/05/how-a-bioethicist-and-doctor-sees-abortion/
Is the Abortion Pill Safe? | Read about Abortion Pill Safety, www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/the-abortion-pill/how-safe-is-the-abortion-pill. Accessed 29 Oct. 2024.
“Marching in wrong direction; Women deserve better than abortion.” Washington Times [Washington, DC], 23 Apr. 2004, p. A23. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A115755194/OVIC?u=cuny_ccny&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=c965702 d. Accessed 27 Oct. 2024.

Manninen BA. A Critical Analysis of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and the Consequences of Fetal Personhood. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 2023;32(3):357-367. doi:10.1017/S0963180122000809
Scholarly Articles on Abortion: History, Legislation & Activism, www.gale.com/open-access/abortion. Accessed 29 Oct. 2024.