Should abortion be outlawed in the United States?

I am taking a writing class and my last assignment was to write a pro or con piece about an issue and mine was the question of abortion and whether or not it should be legal. This was my attempt at it. I guess I could be opening myself up to some criticism here but what the hell.

********************************
Few subjects stir up people’s passions more than the question of abortion. Should abortion be legal? Should society provide easy access to abortions, and provide access on demand?

If we try to take a position on whether or not abortion is morally right or wrong, it is not a simple question, as what is right or wrong, moral or immoral, differs with different people, cultures and different places and times. What is ethical or right or wrong throughout history varies to such extreme degrees that if it proves anything it is that there is no absolute guideline for morality.

The Christian crusaders did not consider slaughtering their Muslim adversaries immoral. Under orders from powerful church-going politicians and military generals, US pilots dropped Dioxin, perhaps the most poisonous substance known to humankind, on Vietnamese peasants and their food supply; they even poisoned their own troops with it. The three million Vietnamese victims never threatened America, never invaded or dropped bombs on America. Was this immoral in the eyes of US society and the numerous moral intellectuals in its universities? Are the orchestrator’s of the slaughter in prison? They are not, in fact, they are, like Henry Kissinger, wealthy, influential members of society. Such is their status that they influence the lives of millions of people.

Few women take abortion lightly. For many women and couples it is a heartbreaking decision. Those opposed to abortion rights, and by that I mean the right of a woman to choose and the obligation of the state to provide safe access to abortions, call themselves pro life and consider women who have had abortions murderers, or anti-life. But it is incorrect to put women who have had abortions in such a category. I support a woman’s right to choose but it is not an easy issue for me. I have known women who have had abortions and it was a decision that they thought about very seriously and with much trepidation. The opponents of abortion are not the only one’s that are pro-life no matter what they think. But leaving aside what we might call those, often men, driven by religious ideology, a women’s decision should be respected whether she chooses to have a child or not. Not all women who refuse to have abortions are right wing ideologues. It seems to me it would be natural for a woman to want to nurture a life that might be developing inside her.

Leaving aside the scientific dilemma that arises when we try to determine when human life begins, I have a hard time accepting the pro-life argument from people who support the war in Iraq or the death penalty as so many of them seem to do. And with religious doctrine as a guide, we also find ourselves in a quagmire. The interpreters and enforcers of religious doctrine are most often old men, most of them with no understanding whatsoever of the situation leading to such a decision and what it means for the woman or her family.

I have known numerous women who chose to terminate their pregnancies and the decision to do so was overwhelmingly economic, in one way or another it was made with concern for her ability to care for a child. According to statistics on why women have abortions provided by the Gutmacher Institute, 75% of them “cite concern for or responsibility to other individuals”. 75% say they cannot afford a child and 75% say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents. Half claim they do not want to be a single parent. All these point to economic reasons in one form or another for terminating pregnancy.

One study finds: “The abortion rate among women living below the federal poverty level ($9,570 for a single woman with no children) is more than four times that of women above 300% of the poverty level (44 vs. 10 abortions per 1,000 women). This is partly because the rate of unintended pregnancies among poor women (below 100% of poverty) is nearly four times that of women above 200% of poverty* (112 vs. 29 per 1,000
women.) “ *
So supporting a woman’s right to choose does not mean the issue ends there. The demands around this issue have to include changes in society that change behavior by allowing people economic freedom to choose one way or another. Access to contraception was a great step forward for women in that it gave them greater control over reproduction. Affordable methods of contraception are crucial along with massive funding in sex education. As far as safety is concerned, I am not aware of any evidence that shows abortions are more dangerous to a person’s health than oral contraceptives that are known to have serious complications.

Rising standards of living and free public education change people’s attitudes to society and the world around them. A woman has the right also to have a child in conditions that do not mean a life of slavery where caring for children denies her the freedom to pursue work and a private life that satisfies her individual and social needs; child care is a social responsibility, not just an individual one. Having a child or family should not condemn a woman or couple to a life of poverty. I was active for many years in a major public sector Union and always fought for on-sight childcare as a benefit that would improve family life and the lives of single mothers in particular. So the question of abortion rights cannot be seen in isolation but must be linked to the question of wages, health care and women not being dependent economically on men.

I believe that we have to have a class approach to abortion, as we should to any significant social issue that affects our daily lives; it’s a class issue. The wives or daughters of the wealthy always have and always will have access to abortion and other rights denied workers and the poor. In the Victorian era, rich men often enjoyed the pleasure of their maids and other working class women in their employ; this coercion is just one form of rape. In the event of pregnancies, the women were threatened with losing their jobs and either risked their lives with back-street abortions or gave up their children to the workhouses. A good example of this is in Robert Altman’s superb film, Gosford Park.

Having money and all the connections such status provides means women in these circles have no problem terminating unwanted and embarrassing pregnancies. This does not mean it is any less difficult a decision for those making it, assuming it is not being made for them; but economics is not such an issue with them. In Ken Loach’s excellent film, Vera Drake, a wealthy father has a doctor recommend termination of his daughter’s unwanted pregnancy for health reasons, this will always occur.

In the last analysis the only way to guarantee women aren’t forced to return to back street abortions is for them to be provided as a social service. Regardless of religious conviction, economic necessity will force this decision on millions of women. Access, coupled with the other social advances I have raised, would be a major factor in allowing women to make a truly “free” decision about childbirth and give them more opportunity to have children and raise them in a secure and nurturing environment.

We should ask nothing less than that a woman should be guaranteed the right to determine when and if she will bring a child in to this world and that means guaranteeing her right to terminate her pregnancy through socially provided safe means.

* Jones RK, Darroch JE and Henshaw SK, Patterns in the socioeconomic characteristics of women obtaining abortions in 2000–2001, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2002, 34(5):226–235.