Pro Life Research Paper

Nearly one in three women will have had at least one abortion by menopause, and 61 percent of women who have abortions are already mothers. An abortion is the act of removing a human embryo or fetus from the uterus of a pregnant woman prior to the completion of the full term of pregnancy. The two sides, pro-choice and pro-life, disagree on whether or not abortions should be legal. Pro-choice people are in favor of abortions when desired by the mother, and allow the mother to make all decisions regarding the pregnancy. In contrast, pro-life people believe abortions should be outlawed, and some within this category suppose abortion could be an option under certain circumstances, such as rape or health risk to the mother. Currently, abortions are legal before 24 weeks into the pregnancy at the mother’s request. Abortion should be legal in the first two trimesters, and allowed when health risks are present in the third trimester because supporting a pro-life stance

takes away a woman's bodily autonomy to bring an unwanted child that often doesn't have the resources to be brought up yet, showing that denying a woman an abortion when requested diminishes her rights to her own body.

Abortions are performed when the mother does not want or can not support the child, only reserved for when necessary. No women get an abortion like it’s no big deal, they get the procedure done when they’re not able to have the child, much less support it. Most women who have abortions are poor or nearly poor and disproportionately women of color, and women in their 20’s account for over 50% of abortions. These groups, unfortunately, often don’t have the resources to support a child, such as the poor and women of color. In their twenties, women often are seeking an education, leaving little to no money or time to handle a child. Others may argue that alternatives to abortion exist, and should be taken up on. “Abortion alternative clinics offer services such as adoption referrals, free pregnancy testing, crisis pregnancy counseling, post-abortion counseling, and homes for pregnant women.” In the suggested abortion alternative clinics, underprivileged mothers are given supplies and a home to raise the child in the first few years. While adoption may be a good option for mothers who want the child and simply don’t have resources at the moment, outlawing abortions would affect those who didn’t want the child. Adoption doesn’t remove the great deal of fees charged by the hospital, and quite honestly, we don’t need more children in adoption facilities, as there are still many to adopt. After giving birth, the mother could form a bond with the child, keep it, and eventually hurt both the mother and child. Abortion alternative clinics provide for a few years at most, not covering college fees or other costs. These “abortion alternative” clinics aren’t alternatives for abortion, it’s alternatives to full-priced parenthood.

Denying access to abortions invalidates a woman’s bodily autonomy, an irrevocable right granted even to the deceased.

People can’t be forced to save other’s lives, so why would we force pregnant women to endure such an invasive thing to occur for nine months, plus medical bills and raising child. Bodily integrity is defined as emphasis on the importance of personal freedom from external control human beings have over their own bodies. Even in the event of pregnancy, control over your own body is a basic human freedom which should not be taken under any circumstance. A person’s body is their property; all should have the right to control decisions that pertain to their bodies. One argument often given is that it’s not just the mother’s body being affected; it’s the unborn child whose rights are being stripped from it before it can even be born. But in actuality, the woman has no obligation to have the child, as it’s her adult body that would be disrespected in favor of a couple of cells yet to form

fully.
With the stalemate involving birth control access and ruling abortion as legal, a simple solution would be to educate and provide access to contraceptives, but since many who oppose abortion disapprove of birth control as well, the problems arise repeatedly. Time writes, “Changes in contraceptive policy simulating the Contraceptive Choice Project would prevent as many as 41% to 71% of abortions performed annually in the United States,” As stated previously, poor and nearly poor women are more likely to need an abortion, as they lack education and money to buy contraceptives. If these less fortunate groups obtained access to what others can, abortion could be avoided entirely, erasing the need for abortions in the first place. Critics may say birth control options are not thoroughly studied; the long term effects could be harmful, and increase the likelihood of developing cancer. Studies show birth control can reduce the risk of endometrial and ovarian cancer, and has minimal, if any, impact on risk of breast cancer. Frankly, this argument demonstrates the low priority we label birth control with. In time and with government funding, researching contraceptives would produce many good effects.

While abortion may not be too crucial to approximately half the population, the right of control over your own body is universal. If a government can tell a pregnant woman she can’t have an abortion, what stops the same government from telling others what they can and cannot do? Holding this right over women’s heads creates a dangerous slope in which the government eventually will attempt to govern anything and everything we do.