A Nation Divided: The Abortion Debate

There are many laws in the United States that protect the medical choices of Americans and their privacy to make decisions without legal judgment. However, there are some topics, such as abortion, that bring forth passionate arguments about the right to choose and the sanctity of life. While pro-choice arguments focus on the impact an unwanted pregnancy and the ethics behind aborting the fetus, the pro-life arguments reflect a respect for the lives of humans and the social consequences of abortion.

The argument about abortion has a long reaching past, back to the 1800’s when medical doctors would perform dangerous surgeries to remove a fetus. As medical technology has improved, the legal and political system had to take a stance on the regulations of aborting a fetus (Kelley 99). In the 1970’s, the Roe vs. Wade case forced all states to accept abortion as a legal right for women over the age of eighteen, although many states have regulations that make only early-term abortions legal and place restrictions on late-term abortions. In the last seven years, there has also been an increase in political discussions about abortion because of the National Health Care Plan and discussions around the ethical decisions surrounding the Plan B pill. The arguments presented by both sides are rooted in research and seek to convince society of the ethical dilemma that abortion brings.

One side of the abortion debate is the pro-choice argument that believes that fetuses are not alive until they are born, that utilitarian arguments can support a woman’s abortion, and is supported by the Roe vs. Wade case for a woman to have access to medical treatments in privacy. The scientific evidence provided by the proponents of pro-choice are arguments based on the point at which something is considered alive, although the evidence provided as support ranges from 24 weeks to the point that the child is born. Since the pro-choice argument means that a fetus isn’t alive until a certain point (depending on the individual’s beliefs), it is acceptable to abort the fetus as if it were simply a collection of cells. The pro-choice argument is based on the elements of the ethical argument of utilitarianism, which is a process of thought that compares the best decisions for the people involved. This means that the pros and cons of the abortion are weighed and a decision is made based on how many people the child’s birth would negatively impact. The utilitarian argument explains that liberty and security can only be gained by taking the liberty and security of someone else (Rajczi 391) and, in this case, means that the fetus may be aborted to maintain the liberty and security of the mother. Generally, this is used as an argument for mothers who are either too young or are too poor to care for the child, and that bringing the birth to term would mean lowering the quality of life for either the mother or the other children in the family. The result of this thought process is the Roe vs. Wade decision that ensured women have the Constitutional right to privacy when making medical decisions and that women have the right to terminate a pregnancy if they decide it is best for themselves or their existing children. However, there is also refuting evidence that supports the opposing, pro-life, argument.

The pro-life argument is supported by ethical arguments as well and by religious backgrounds and beliefs based on how to define a living human. Don Marquis, a philosopher, as paraphrased by Alex Rajczi, explains that the anti-abortion argument consists of three steps: healthy fetuses have the same entitlement to life as an adult or healthy infant; if healthy fetuses have the same entitlement as an adult or healthy infant, abortion is immoral; therefore, most abortions are immoral (379). This reasoned argument attempt to support the anti-abortion argument does not rely on religious reasons and is often used by atheist or agnostic pro-life supporters (Rajczi 385). However, there are also many arguments against abortion with faith as a basis. When the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision was decided Richard McCormick, who studies the Catholic Church, said the response of American bishops was “‘the strongest, and in this sense, most radical episcopal statement I have ever encountered’” (Kelly 103). Many religious groups, including the Catholic Church, believe that human life begins at conception and should be protected by the belief that life is sacred and should be protected. Roe vs. Wade meant that the law was in opposition with the Church’s beliefs about murder, and since the Church considers a fetus a human being since conception, this meant that the legal system (from the Church’s perspective) was justifying a form of killing. While pro-choice supporters often use biology to prove that a fetus isn’t alive until later in the pregnancy term, religious groups respond that they are more concerned more with the impact that abortion has on society rather than issues of biology (Driedger and Halli 129). The religious groups are concerned with how people view unborn children; that if people don’t consider a fetus a living thing, that they are opposing the sanctity of life. If a society doesn’t accept all living things as having a right to live, they are going against the components of their religion and the sacredness of all lives.

There is some grey area in the pro-choice versus pro-life debate regarding special circumstances surrounding the pregnancy in cases of rape, incest, or if the pregnancy may cause the mother’s death. Advocates from both sides may accept these reasons as grounds for performing an abortion, even if a pro-life individual believes that abortion is wrong in other circumstances. Research shows that a child conceived by rape may cause mental health issues in the mother and would be detrimental to both child and mother (Ludlow 476). This outcome shows the woman whose fetus was created by force is many times traumatized and the situation can become psychologically harmful if the mother cannot overcome the stress of the situation (Driedger and Halli 135). The other area of variation to the pro-life argument is if the woman’s health is at risk and carrying the birth to term. If a birth will harm the woman physically to the point of mortal danger, the fetus may be aborted to save the woman’s life. Again, this is a variation of pro-life argument, meaning that an individual may identify as being pro-life but accept the option to abort a fetus if there is a strong possibility of the mother’s death.

Based on the evidence provided, the pro-life argument has stronger support because it defines life as beginning at the moment where the sperm and ova combine and provides alternatives for mothers of unwanted children so that abortions aren’t necessary. There are options available to the mother that allows her to pursue her education and life while also giving an adoptive parent the opportunity to love and raise a child. Foster homes, adoption agencies, and even relatives welcome the unwanted children and the children have a right to life. The 

There are many ways to support the pro-life movement and the actions can range from offering time or money to programs in the community that offer mothers options for dealing with a teen pregnancy or an unwanted pregnancy. There are many local and national organizations that support young mothers (Options for Life is one of them) and offers them housing and financial assistance until their child is born; offering medical care, housing, and placement of children into foster or adoptive homes. These organizations are expensive to run and require many donations or resources to keep them active in the community, but they are effective because, statistically, the mother will generally come from low socioeconomic status but may still want to give birth to the child. While many of these groups have affiliations with religious groups, the mother does not generally have to belong to the church and will receive assistance if needed. Once the child is born, they may not immediately have adoptive parents available so the child may be placed in a foster situation until he or she can be placed. To support this aspect of the pro-life movement, individuals can also offer volunteer hours in these locations to give attention and care to the newborn. 

Another program to support the pro-life movement is to get involved in organizations that seek to help young people avoid pregnancy, such as abstinence or birth control methods. There are many clinics available that can educate teenagers about the risks of intercourse and how to be responsible in the choices they make. Some groups, especially ones that are religious based, suggest that abstinence is the only way to avoid unwanted pregnancy while other groups encourage the use of various contraceptives. In fact, studies show that when women were encouraged to use (or have their partner use) birth control, there were 95% fewer unwanted pregnancies (Hussey 100).  The group that an individual chooses to support is based on personal beliefs; however, both methods can help stop or minimize unwanted pregnancies. 

Both the pro-life and the pro-choice communities agree that the best way to reduce the number of abortions performed is to increase social welfare programs that help people avoid pregnancy or provide support for mothers from a low socioeconomic status. The benefit of the social welfare program is that they “could substantially reduce abortions with the controversy of abortion legislation” (Hussey 76). This benefit means that these programs do not get classified as being pro-life or pro-choice, but instead improves the lives of the people involved so they will not have to seek an abortion in the first place. Hussey supports this opinion by providing evidence that “economic hardships ranks among the most frequently cited reasons for abortions” (75).  If pregnant women feel they can give birth to and raise their child with financial support from a social program, they might not have to even consider abortion as an option. For both sides of the argument, the goal is to do what is best for the mother; in this case, it would also help the mother do what is best for the child. 

The topic of abortion brings out many passionate opinions, both for the pro-choice community and the pro-life community. However, the person who has the most difficult decision is the mother who is weighing her options. The pro-choice option gives the mother the legal right to terminate a pregnancy while the pro-life option encourages the mother to keep the child for moral reasons. Helping a woman make the right decision by supporting her financially and socially can be best for both mother and child; letting both celebrate the miracle of life.

Works Cited

Driedger, Leo, and Shiva S. Halli. "Pro Life or Pro Choice: Politics of Career and Homemaking." Population Studies 51.2 (1997): 129-137. Academic Search Premier. 

Hussey, Laura S. "Is Welfare Pro-Life? Assistance Programs, Abortion, And the Moderating Role of States." Social Service Review 85.1 (2011): 75-107. Academic Search Premier. 

Kelly, James R. "Sociology and Public Theology: A Case Study of Pro-Choice/Prolife Common Ground." Sociology of Religion 60.2 (1999): 99-124. Academic Search Premier. 

Ludlow, Jeannie. "Love and Goodness: Toward A New Abortion Politics." Feminist Studies 38.2 (2012): 474-483. Academic Search Premier. Web. 

Rajczi, Alex. "Abortion, Competing Entitlements, And Parental Responsibility." Journal of Applied Philosophy 26.4 (2009): 379-395. Academic Search Premier.