In today’s society one of the issues in discussion is when is it authorized to take a life? Murder due to any reason cannot be justified even if whole world unites to provide reason for it. Abortion is mentally and psychologically damaging for a woman and many women never recover from this loss. It should be prohibited for many reasons. The most of these reasons related to the risks associated with the abortion. If for any reason abortion is inevitable, other options should be chosen to avoid the murder of an innocent life.
The article written by William Alex Pridemore and Joshua D. Freilich, named “The Impact of State Laws Protecting Abortion Clinics and Reproductive Rights on Crimes against Abortion” is a hypothesis that explains the effects of laws in prohibition of abortion. Most of the U.S states have passed laws against abortion and have implied strict punishments for violation of the laws. The hypothesis drawn from this article suggests that the laws had a strict effect on the rate of abortion related crimes in states that prohibit this crime. The data that authors collected from research proves the application and advantages of clinical and reproductive rights. This discussion contextualizes the results that are obtained the regression and control the application of laws against abortion cases and discusses the alternative explanations of for the found data and suggests future modifications and implications required for the legislations and policy that states should apply in more research and development related to abortion issue (Frelich et al., 2007).
There is very little attention given to this severe issue, which is one of the most sensitive issues in United States society, but unfortunately it receives very less attention and consideration on its adverse effects and effects that it has on crime rate. This issue was covered on television on 1994 Florida case in which a doctor who was involved in abortion was shot in the hospital.
The option of alternatives in case an abortion is needed is emphasized due to many reasons. There are child protection institutes that are fighting for the cause of child protection and are providing safety and protection to the children who have lost their parents or who are abandoned. Parents who do not have children also are referring to these institutes to adopt these children and take care of them. This option is the ethical most in case of abortion need and it is suggested in most states. There are also some psychological and physical effects of abortion, a women undergoing abortion is susceptible to infection, extreme blood loss and in even death. Another effect of abortion is the increase in the chance of breast cancer. During the pregnancy as the woman undergoes development in her breast structure, an interruption in the development process may lead to variation in hormones and eventually distortion of cells leading to breast cancer. This fact can also be justified by data of breast cancer cases which indicates a large number of women who have an abortion in their lifetime.
The laws against abortion in the U.S are active since 1965 and until now most states have banned the procedure. There are some exceptions as in case of a rape a mother may want an abortion and it is allowed in this situation. The abortion laws in 1973 have made null and void the state laws now and have introduced laws for the country. In these laws the woman is given a 24 hour decision period until the procedure starts and her guardian or parents is notified if the mother is less than 18 years of age. There are some institutions that prohibit abortion process after the woman has entered the third phase of her pregnancy period (Frelich et al., pp. 615).
The decline in abortion rate in 2008-11 is considered due to strict allegations most of which were in effect till 2011. The decrease in abortion rate in 44 States of Columbia, and some states with even few restrictions like California. The data collected however, does not confirms that the decrease was only cause of the restrictions. According to this research the rate of abortions was not in decline rather it stayed between 40 and 42% during 2008 to 2011. Similarly the rate of unplanned births dropped to its 1 fifth.
A more accurate study that gives an alternate explanation of the decrease in abortion rate in 2008-11 states that the rate was at its minimum in this period, also the rate of unintended pregnancies fell by 13 to 18% is a more accurate evidence of the decline as a reason of the legislations. However there are some factors that are said to be involved in decrease of the rate after 2011. Most of the restrictions did not keep women from undergoing abortion rather the ban on Medical Coverage and number of trips that are required before undergoing the process of abortion did. The abortion opposition also contributed in raising the cost of abortion process also is suggested to cause decrease in the rate. For example, the 2013 Law of Texas state that made restrictions in abortion process and its period is suggested to contribute in the decline.
The data for complete explanation of the decline in abortion rate is still in acquisition. However some states show significant decrease in the rate, like Ohio, Maine, Texas and Oklahoma, by making it more difficult to undergo abortion, both by cutting the funding for family planning programs and by making it difficult for organized family planning providers to access general public. The banned applied on Texas health organizations that provide abortion or help in the planning process caused a great reduction in number of women who referred to these organizations for the process, and this reduction was more significant in 2013. Similarly defunding Planned Parenthood programs that were applied both federally and on state levels have caused reduction in the rate significantly after 2011.
The enforcement of these laws as described by the authors could have resulted in a backlash effect that was predicted by various authors (Sherman, 1993, Pichardo-Almazar, & Rivera, 1999) in their research that state applications of these reproductive laws and access to abortion clinics could have resulted in higher rates of the crime in the states where the law was not this strict or absent.
The evidence for decrease in rate of abortion after 2011 is still insufficient. However it validates the common perception that refraining women’s access to family planning facilities not only improved women health and domestic right, but it also resulted in significant reduction of the abortion rate.
The examples in the article make it seem reasonable to believe that these laws had a discouraging effect related to abortion. Unfortunately, due to lack of sufficient data and economic or social legislature’s effect on rate of abortion, the author of the article did not fully proved the reasons behind the decrease in rate. But it encourages us to do further research on this issue and power up the hypothesis. In my opinion, the state laws against this inhumane act should be more severe and the culprits who perform such an act are to be punished and discouraged, despite the chances of backlash. The government should discourage the clinics who help perform the process or provide suggestions for it, as this is our moral responsibility to care for our children and women.