29 Nov. 2012
Women’s War for Reproductive Rights
The most challenging social issue in America today is not just abortion, but a woman’s right to contraceptives and reproductive health. Generally abortion is an issue that has always been questioned but is an ambiguous subject, even though abortions have been allowed by the Supreme Court for almost five decades. The debate is where to draw the line for contraceptive availability, abortion laws, and healthcare. The argument ranges from; free contraceptives, full healthcare, and whenever the mother decides; to no contraceptives, paid-for healthcare, and none at all. Neither of these arguments can be supported and bring into question human morality, individual freedom and personal responsibilities, as well as federal and state responsibility. The proper role of federal and state government is to ensure women’s basic rights to safe, affordable reproductive healthcare and choice regarding its use. In America today we have states like Virginia, which want to change the policies regarding women’s reproductive freedom. Tobias Wolff, a writer for the Huffington Post reported, “The Virginia legislature has passed a bill that will force women seeking an abortion to undergo a medically unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound” (Wolff 1). This now mandatory ultrasound is a government overreach to control women’s reproductive rights by making them go through such an embarrassing unnecessary procedure. Making a woman have a normal ultrasound does the same thing as a transvaginal one. It’s just a lot more humane and comforting for the woman, and a woman should have one before an abortion decision because picture proof evidence that you have a life forming inside you can greatly affect a woman’s decision, but a transvaginal ultrasound is just unnecessary. But there are states, such as Nebraska, that don’t want to outlaw abortion or make ridiculous deterrents, that wish to make it more humane by adopting a more Pro-Choice law. Monica Davey, a columnist for the New York Times, states “The law it replaces banned abortions after a fetus reaches viability, or can survive outside the womb. This is determined case by case but is generally considered to come around 22 weeks at the earliest” (Davey 1). This is a reasonable law giving a woman “22 weeks at the earliest” to choose whether or not she wants to have an abortion. Women mostly young and skinny, might not even know that their pregnant till about 18 weeks and when thinking about aborting a life a woman really needs to take some time to think about what she is going to do. Davey elaborates more on the court ruling she wrote about “The new law grants exceptions only in cases of medical emergency, the pregnant woman’s imminent death, or a serious risk of “substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function,” a provision experts interpreted as an effort to exclude an exception based on a woman’s mental health” (Davey 1). This means that the new law gives women the right to abortions “in cases of medical emergency, the pregnant woman’s imminent death” which stays true to the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause. This clause states that no state shall deprive any citizen of life, liberty, or property. This is a reasonable law giving a woman “22 weeks at the earliest” to choose whether or not she wants to have an abortion. Women mostly young and skinny might not even know that they are pregnant until about 18 weeks and when thinking about aborting a life, a woman really needs to take some time to think about what she is going to do. If a woman can die from childbirth, denying abortion as an option constitutes a deprivation of life and Nebraska comprehends that, which is why Nebraskan law protects women’s right to abortion and should be the example for the federal law of all states. There are two different political forces within women’s reproductive rights, Pro-Lifers, and Pro-...