For a long time, those who abort have been stereotyped as outcasts in the communities. Abortion was considered a crime regardless of the condition which the mother was in at the time. It entails the termination of pregnancy. However, it can be conducted under various circumstances. It can be conducted if the mother can lose her life if she carries the pregnancy to term or if it complicated that requires the survival of one person. That is either the baby or the mother. In most of the cases, mothers are given an opportunity to live (David 94). Nevertheless, there are those who opt for abortion since they are not ready for the baby. Some inject drugs or take them via mouth to get rid of the baby. Nonetheless, abortion should have limits to avoid humans acting inhumanly. It encourages irresponsibility among the parents who are healthy but are reluctant to forego some of their lifestyles.
Courts in the U.S were against the use of contraception and any person found to be taking them was liable in a court of law. Fines would be introduced to such persons as a way of deterring usage of them. Nevertheless, the law would later not be applicable to married couples since it would have been viewed as interference in the family institutions. The couples had been granted the liberty to control birth to getting the number of children of their preference (Dorothy 72). In most cases, the number of children depended on the income levels of the parents. They were encouraged to give birth to children who they could be able to support in their provision of their basic needs.
Some justices felt that the Supreme Court was unconstitutional in passing of the judgment. They argued that there was nowhere the constitution indicated the rights about privacy. The constitution was quite on the issue resulting to the judges making their own deliberations on the matter to suit the matter at hand. Granting permission to parents to conduct abortion would be based on their choice of whether they were willing to keep the baby or not. Conception would have occurred due to failure of taking the contraceptives that the government was so much against (David 121). In the year 1973, the court did not have the constitutional rights to governing the abortions that would happen the first trimester. This was because in the first trimester, the mother would have more health complications after the abortion. The eradication of the zygote was right as people perceived it to have no rights since it was in its formation stage.
However, in the 1960’s abortion rules took another twist from being illegal to legal. Feminist movements started in protest of the rules that governed the abortion since; they had so had so many restrictions. Two women from law school from Texas filed a complaint in the courts. They were acting on behalf of pregnant woman as they claimed outlawing abortion was an abuse of human rights (Dorothy 245). The court had prohibited the woman from conducting an abortion as she could not have moved out of the country. The Supreme Court in the U.S found the judge who had delivered the judgment wrong siting that he acted unconstitutional. Abortion constituted the special rights of the individuals; therefore, they were not supposed to have meddled in her business of either terminating or keeping the pregnancy.
The regulation of the pregnancy by the supreme courts helped to bring sanity in abortion processes. People would obey the state laws due to the force and power it comes with. Other abortion regulating bodies might not bear outcomes without the involvement of the law. However, humanitarian organization should be involved in regulating the abortion rate. It has been legalized in some countries, and for those still fighting it, women have been able to claim their rights. The women movements contributed greatly in the legalizing of abortion since; in the past it would not be accepted at any cost. It was the best avenue to use for fighting for their rights. It also showed that they knew their constitutional rights. By knowing their rights as humans, it contributed a lot to their being vocal. The levels of education helped them in being persistent to pursue the abortion rights.
On the other hand, Canada was one country was not really concerned about abortion. They had not formulated the laws to govern abortion for a long time. They had once tried to impose the rules and regulations on abortion but they later faced eviction by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court found it unnecessary to have them as they were perceived to violate the human rights of choosing. Canada operates abortions without any governing body to regulating the acts. It has been ascertained that both the women and the doctors are accountable enough in the abortion line.
In some ways, the politicians in Canada would indirectly control abortion in their areas of jurisdiction without their knowledge. The failure to provide adequate medical services in most of the rural areas would force the mothers keeps their pregnancy to the term. The demographic factor was the main challenge when it came to abortions. The enormous size of the country and being scarcely populated helped in a way in the control of abortion. Few health facilities would be available in the country leaving no option to the pregnant ladies. Many doctors in Canada were not for the idea of abortion due to their observance of their ethical values. This further discouraged the abortion in most women as the services had become out of reach.
The doctors who would conduct the abortion faced several threats from the people who were against it. For instance, the three Canadian doctors who were shot and the assassin were believed to be someone who was against abortion. Therefore, the practice would keep the doctors in fear of conducting any abortions. They had to value their lives more leading to the reduction of the abortion rates. Nevertheless, there was one doctor who risked his life by being in the forefront advocating for abortion in Canada.
Legalization of abortion was pioneered by women, health and legal societies and humanitarian groups. The argued that criminalizing the act was an extreme measure of curbing the vice of abortion since at times health issue are involved. Bills were tabled in the parliament to pass the law that legalized abortion (David 236). It was fully supported making it hard to bringing to the book those who conducted the abortion and those who aided it. Conveniences of legal abortion remain a challenge to most people especially the low income earners. Legalizing of abortion had led to many deaths in Canada. Some health professionals felt the need to act urgently to stop the mortality rate of mothers due to unsafe abortions. They would opt to execute the abortions in their workplaces.
Jailing of one of the doctors who assisted in the abortions triggered the movements by people as they demanded for his release. Most women were recruited into the movement to protest the move to criminalize abortion. To air their grievances well, some went to the extent of shackling themselves in the House of Commons for the parliamentarians to listen to them. This was the best way to demonstrate as their actions would force the closure of the building.
The Supreme Court in Canada upheld the move by the women movements arguing that the law was infringing on the rights of the women. It was professed to be unjust and biased to women.
Abortion is more inclined to the moral values than it is to the legal side. People who conduct abortions are believed to lack the cultural and human values that find the life of individuals worthy granting no one any right to end the life of any person. To help in solving the conflict between the women and the government, law was to be proposed that authorized only the doctors to conduct the abortion. The bill failing to pass depicted how strong the Canadian women were and aware of their rights. They believed that it was their health that was at risk; hence no one should have been concerned with the legality of the action. At the end, the government opted out on the game of formulation of laws that regulated abortion.
The demonstrations used by the women movements were the best as they drew a lot of attention form the government (Dorothy 147). The government was forced to provide more public hospitals were accessible for abortion by most women to reduce the mortality rates in the country. The deaths of the mothers led to the reduction of the population of the country than needed many people to occupy the vast area. The more one imposes rules and regulations on the people, the easier it is for them to break them to prove that they can control themselves, thus the resistance. The involvement of the Supreme Court depicted that they were respecting the rules of the land. Conversely, they were ready to challenge any law that they would view to be infringing on their personal rights.
The pro-abortion advocates were right since they were trying to save the lives of the infants. They valued the lives of the infants at the expense of their mothers as they insisted that no abortion should be allowed whatsoever. It was not the best option they would have made as they were supposed to consider both lives. They were supposed to provide some special cases where abortion would be legal. Protesting of the women would legalize the abortion of so many infants that had no control of the nature, before indulging into sexual behaviors; the partners should be advised to take precaution measures that prevented pregnancy. Legalizing of abortions increased the immorality rates in the country as women were at liberty to remove the fetus. The adoption of no rule by the advocates showed that they trusted the citizens in conducting themselves in the desirable ways (David 342). Washing off their hands from the issue reduced the antagonism with the women, creating a peaceful environment to live in. It was the best way to handle the issue as it gave the individuals a chance to reflect on their lives.
Work cited:
Abigail C. Saguy, What is Sexual Harassment? From Capitol Hill to the Sorbonne. (California,
2003).
Dorothy Stetson, Abortion Politics, Women's Movements, and the Democratic State: A
Comparative Study of State Feminism (Oxford,
2001);
http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=109849904
David Garrow, Liberty and Sexuality: The Right to Privacy and the Making of Roe v. Wade (U.
California, 1998)
