Abortion Rights Should be reinforced

Since abortion became legal in recent years

There have been numerous issues that are posing a danger to and infringing on the right to an abortion. A trip down memory lane reveals that the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion, has come to light again. The Supreme Court’s majority of judges ruled that the decision deemed it to be normal. It was subsequently recognized as one of the fundamental liberties as a result. Thereafter, any form of legal process that has been considered to challenge or contradict the right to abortion rights was to be looked at critically before allowing any ruling that may go against the same judgment on abortion (Editor 2).

Debates on the legalities of abortion

There are a lot debates around different circles going on about the legalities of abortion. With most of the states observing the federal laws on abortion, some have not come in terms with the fact it is therein enshrined in the constitution. Women are the one’s drastically affected by these laws and they’re the ones that have been denied the constitutional right. There needs to be a reinforcement of the abortion law.

The worrisome future of abortion rights

According to the New York Times article “worrisome future of abortion rights,” the author of the article seems to put a lot of questions on the future state of abortion rights. The author in the article writes a story about the sheriff, Joe Arpaio, who would compel the female inmates to get court orders before executing abortions. This kind of gesture begs a lot of questions as what is the state of the constitution on the right to abort for women. Coming from some of the past misogynistic mindsets such the one the sheriff mentioned in the article had, it becomes stupendous tragedy of gigantic proportions to have women not to fully exercise their constitutional rights to abort (Editor 2). In connection to the sheriff’s case, there is the Trumps administration.

17-year-old immigrant barred from abortion

Just recently, the Trumps administration stopped a 17-year-old immigrant from executing an abortion. This came after the court ruling by Texas Judge that the girl was mature and was able to make decisions on her own. According the ruling of 1973 by Roe V. Wade:

Decisions about one’s reproductive health, including decisions on when to terminate a pregnancy, is part of a woman’s fundamental right to privacy and any infringement on this right must be justified by the state with a compelling interest (Editor 2). Regulating abortions pre viability further neither maternal health nor “Potentiality of human life”.

Current events and the right to abortion

My critique: all the current events that are surrounding the rights of women to abort are not all adhering to the ruling by Roe V. Wade. What we are witnessing currently in the corridors of justice is an attempt by several stakeholders and parts of the federal laws are channeled attempts to infringe the many women’s right to exercise abortion. In the case of sheriff, Joe Arpaio, it might be due to the fact that he still was part of the idiosyncrasy that women are not to have any say on the reproductive health. It will require more sensitization of the larger population that still are slaves of past mindsets that women cannot be left alone to make their own decisions. This may further call for the more sensitization to the members of the public on what the federal laws has to say on abortions. In the case of the 17-years girl, Joe Doe, who was held in custody and was under duress to undergo several counseling sessions to make her not to execute the abortion, tells us that there is a huge chasm among the stakeholders in the courts (Editor). The general solicitor, Noel J Francisco, had to put up a lot of stringent measures to halt any future abortions by teenagers. Some of them are eighteen and old enough to make sound and safe decisions on what they want with their reproductive health just as asserted by the famous federal supreme court ruling of Roe V. Wade ruling of 1973.

Ohio bans abortion after twenty weeks

Another recent occurrence that really compromises the laws on the right to abortion is from the article by The Economist “Ohio bans abortion after twenty weeks”. The governor of Ohio signed more than seventeen bills that were stringent on abortions. His ban on abortions is contradicting the federal laws on abortion and the ruling by Roe V. Wade. According to the Roe ruling, women were allowed to execute abortion up to the third trimester at a period of twenty-four weeks. This ban, therefore, goes against the grain and makes one of the violations against women who have made their choice on executing the abortion (Greenhouse). According to the parties that were pro the ban, they assert that a fetus at twenty to twenty-four weeks have started to experience life. It means, according to them, that all the experiences of a fetus are those similar to the adult human being, and this translates to murder. The arguments by the pro-life activists and the governor are not as per the federal laws. This in itself is a contravention of the federal laws.

The difficulties of getting an abortion

On the contrary, the article by The New Yorker “why it’s becoming so hard to get an abortion” is trying to explicate further some of the difficulties that women have to undergo for them to procure an abortion. In fact, the author of the article brings forth cases where the law serves in the interest of punishing women who are on the course of getting an abortion (Editor 3). According to professor, Carol Sanger, of Harvard, who echoes the same sentiments in her book titled “About abortion.”

Observing the federal laws on abortion

There is still a lot to be done in order to observe the federal laws on abortion. Most of the states have not amended the laws on abortion ever since the Supreme Court ruling of 1973 by Roe V. Wade. There needs to be a good rapport between the federal government and the states government in order to reinforce the laws on abortion. This will play a very important role to help some of the citizens that are not still aware of what the federal laws stipulate about abortion. The likes of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, it comes out clearly that he still holds on to the past and views women as not being protected by the same laws that protect men. Most women like Joe Doe will ultimately have something to smile about when they get to have a freedom of what to do with their reproductive health. This will give many oppressed women a voice of choice and the voice to speak for themselves. But, above all, it will be for the common good of upholding the constitution and having all the people aware of what the constitution has to say on abortion.

Works Cited

Editor. “Ohio bans abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy.” The Economist (2016): 1-4. Document.

Greenhouse, Linda. “The worrisome future of abortion rights .” 9 November 2017. The New York Times. Document. 12 December 2017.