The debate between pro-lifers and pro-choicers has a history of more than 30 years. Since abortion was legalized by U.S. Supreme Court, society has divided in the opinion over the necessary social policies as well as on the issue of shaping the attitudes of future generations. The debate is so deep and strong that it has become almost an ideology. Both the supporters and opponents of abortion present strong arguments while defending their position, and it is a matter of personal choice to decide which opinion is right and which is wrong. Notably, pro-choice and pro-life supporters agree on the major issues related to women’s rights: the woman has the right to do what she wants with the unwanted tissues in her body.
According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the number of abortions has declined 11% in the period of the last ten years (Lucier, p. 1), with the greatest number of pro-life supporters among adolescents. Further, the recent research pointed out that one-third of Americans have changed their opinion of abortion within the last ten years; two-thirds of the American population believes that pregnant women should not get an abortion. Lucier does not provide his own opinion on the issue, however, it is clear from his article that he opposes abortion. For example, he notes that abortion is the “form of the self-imposed collective suicide” (Lucier, p.1). Legalized abortions may lead to a decline in the global population because women decide not to give birth to the child when they are already pregnant. As a result, most of the European nations will be aging, and there will not be enough young people to replace the older generations. It might have a negative impact on the economy, social, and political life of many countries. Lucier concludes with the note that the United States, despite the legalized abortion, is not at risk of having a low birthrate because of the many people being religious.
The main issue underlying the abortion debate is whether the fetus is the person. Some people believe that fetus is the person from the very moment of conception. Others claim that the fetus becomes a person only when it is born. Thus, if it is not a person but a part of a female’s body, the woman should have the right to choose whether she wants it to be the part of her. As Daniel Oliver has noted in his article “Deciding Abortion: the key questions,” if neither tradition nor science can tell whether the fetus is the person or not, it is impossible to give definition to it in legal terms as well. Therefore, the State cannot legislate either side of the debate because, despite the side taken for right, the decision will be based on assumption, not fact. Daniel Oliver appears to be the supporter of the pro-life side of the debate, even though he does not impose his opinion on the reader and does not write that abortion is wrong. He simply notes that the decision to kill a human being cannot be corrected, while the decision to give birth is more morally and emotionally right. The question of whether the fetus is a person or not is a very important factor in the debate, while Oliver has failed to provide additional information on this issue.
Women seeking abortions may consider the impact of another child on the family members, including children. Very few females take health problems into consideration. While for the vast majority of females, relationships, financial and educational issues are the most important. Thus, the decision to have an abortion is not a spontaneous one, and women typically approach it with care though. For example, the moral importance of being the best parent able to satisfy all needs of the child is the most significant issue (Stewart & Darney, p. 37). These factors are very logical and are understood by both pro-life and pro-choice supporters. Anti-choice arguments often stereotype women are selfish, getting an abortion is not an easy decision. Stewart and Darney have discussed both sides of the argument without making special emphasis on either side. Pro-life and pro-choice supporters have the right to have their own opinion, and each of them has valid reasons to support their position.
Despite the widespread idea that religions oppose abortions, there is historical evidence that religious leaders and followers do not oppose abortions, and their opinion is divided on the issue as well. John Hoffmann and Sherrie Johnson have conducted the research presented in the article titled “Attitudes towards abortion among religious traditions in the United States: change or continuity” have destroyed the myth about abortions being religiously forbidden. Moreover, religious traditions have played one of the most important roles in the abortion debate: Protestants, in particular, entered the political fray only because of their strong opposition to abortion rights. At the same time, it cannot be denied that the Catholic Church promotes extreme pro-life beliefs. Religion can be the central force leading the woman to an abortion-related decision, while the Church itself may not oppose the decision to have an abortion and consider the abortion the matter of elective and traumatic reasons. Thus, the adherence to religious beliefs is the rather weak and limited argument of pro-life supporters.
The pro-life opinion stresses the fact that women who got an abortion experience a wide range of physical and mental health problems. This argument is strong because numerous women do experience post-abortion depression and regret getting an abortion. The fact that there are many organizations providing support to women who got abortions indicates that the problem does exist, and abortion leads to negative results. On the other side, pro-choice supporters reply that there are equally many organizations offering free information on abortion, which empowers pregnant women in their decision. As C. Coren presented in her report, the period of rehabilitation after abortion is short, and women feel improvement in physical and emotional health as early as within one month. The pregnant young girl might consider abortion as the only decision because she is afraid of the reaction of her parents and does not know where to seek support. If she is provided with enough information about abortion, medical procedures, and centers offering support to young mothers, she may change her opinion. In the opposite situation, the pregnant woman might want to get an abortion, however, because of the family families or religious beliefs, she will decide to give birth to the unwanted child.
The pro-choice opinion is based on the idea that the woman will not love the child she did not want, and if she is not granted the right to decide, neither she nor the child will be happy together in the future. It is a strong argument as well because it shows that the birth of the unwanted child can lead to negative psychological results to the same extent abortion does. Notably, both pro-choicers and pro-lifers agree on the need to inform young people about pregnancy, abortions, and contraception. Fred Nunes notes that “religious institutions are pivotal in nurturing moral precepts in each of us” (p. 13). He continues that young people who strictly follow the moral rules and do not engage in sexual activity until they have formed a stable union are less likely to reach the decision to get an abortion. It is important that young people receive information about sexual life from the people they trust: their parents, religious leaders, and peers. Obtained information helps young people to decide on the course of abstention, to rely on contraceptives, or to commit to a faithful relationship.
Pro-life activists argue that abortions are the result of the lack of information. According to the statistics, every second abortion is the repeat one. It means that hospitals do not provide enough support, contraceptive information, and counseling. This is the failure of current legislation. If to assume a neutral position on the abortion debate, it is possible to say that pro-life supporters are more radical. They organize public campaigns, strive to impose their point of view on oppositionists, and struggle to legalize their position on the issue. Notably, 97% of all women are happy about being pregnant (Hollander, p. 203); they place a high value on pregnancy. Half of these women, at the same time, believe that abortion should be available without restrictions, while only 8% oppose abortion under any circumstances. Half of these women have an abortion, and the other half give birth to a child. Thus, the decision to have an abortion is not about the selfishness of the pregnant woman, it is a matter of circumstances. The statistics provided by Hollander is a very strong argument in favor of the pro-choice position.
In conclusion, it is impossible to state with confidence which side of the debate is based on stronger reasons. Pro-life and pro-choice supporters provide strong views on the position and support their claims with valid statistical information. Notably, despite the opposing views, both pro-lifers and pro-choicers refer to the same reasons but consider them from the opposite sides (Pro-lifers claim that fetus is the person, pro-choicers disagree; pro-lifers refer to the post-abortion depression, pro-choicers stress the negative psychological outcomes of unwanted childbirth). The abortion debate is like a coin: both sides are closely related but are in opposition to one another. For many years to come, the debate will grow deeper, and the global legislators will not be able to make a legitimate decision on the right to abortion. Abortion was and remains a matter of personal choice, and each woman is free to choose what side of the debate is more reasonable for her.
Works Cited
- Coren, C. “Shortly after Early Abortion, Women Report Significant Improvements in Physical and Emotional Well-Being.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 35.3 (2003): 150.
- Hoffmann, John and Sherrie Mills Johnson. “Attitudes toward abortion among religious traditions in the United States: change or continuity?” Sociology of Religion (2005): 1-17.
- Hollander, D. “In Certain Circumstances, Women in Prenatal Care Would Not Rule out Having an Abortion in the Future.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 37.4 (2005): 203-204.
- Lucier, James. “Numbers favor prolific pro-lifers: as the pro-life/pro-choice debate moves into its fourth decade, the consequences of abortion are looming over many countries that face a decline in birthrates and population growth that could undermine social stability – Special report: population bomb.” Insight on News 24 2002: 1.
- Nunes, Fred. “Abortion: Thinking Clearly about Controversial Public Policy.” African Journal of Reproductive Health 8.3 ( 2004): 11-26.
- Oliver, Daniel. “Deciding abortion: the key questions.” National Review 2005: 1.
- Stewart, Felicia and Philip Darney. “Abortion: Teaching Why as Well as How.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 35.1 (2003): 37-39.