Arguments For and Against Abortion in the U S

Why the Arguments in Favor of Abortion Outweigh the Opposition

Today, the issue of abortion is at front and center of a heated national debate that could easily determine the next president of the United States as well as the reproductive freedom of American women for generations to come. Indeed, since the 50-year precedent established by Roe v. Wade was overturned on June 24, 2022 with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, numerous states have enacted draconian anti-abortion laws. So-called “pro-life” proponents of the Dobbs decision maintain that the arguments against legal abortion are sufficiently compelling to allow the states to make this decision on behalf of their residents. Conversely, so-called “pro-choice” advocates argue that there are fundamental counterpoints that make it clear that legalized abortion should be the law of the entire land. The purpose of this paper is to provide clear reasons why the Dobbs decision was not only wrong, but downright cruel to women and their family members. Following this analysis, the paper provides a summary of the arguments for and against legal abortion as well as the rationale in support of the latter in the U.S. in the conclusion.

I. Right to life versus reproductive rights

On the one hand, anti-abortionists believed that life begins at conception and should be protected from the outset. In this regard, Jacobs reports that, “[T]he scientific fact, which everyone really knows, that human life begins at conception” (221). This view is echoed throughout the peer-reviewed and other scholarly literature in some shape or form, varying only in the amount of time that pregnant women have to secure a legal abortion before the illegal abortion clock kicks in.

On the other hand, though, it is also important to note that access to safe, legal abortion is considered a basic reproductive right. The fact that the Supreme Court was forced to rely on a 12th century legal opinion to support Dobbs makes it clear that times have changed and there is abundant scientific evidence that the implications of this decision have far-reaching effects that may affect women’s rights for generations to come. For instance, according to Minkoff et al., “The loss of the federally protected constitutional right to an abortion is a threat to the already tenuous autonomy of pregnant people, and may augur future challenges to their right to refuse unwanted obstetric interventions” (12).

II. Female bodily autonomy

Pro-choice advocates maintain that all women have the right to make decisions about their own bodies. This argument is supported by professional healthcare organizations that emphasize the need to respect the manner in which women make a decision as well as the need to respect that decision, even if clinicians disagree. For example, Miller argues that, “Providing women with a legally recognized property interest in their uteruses comports with a modern understanding of bodily autonomy, accords with present day uses of women’s reproductive capacities, and protects their personhood from undue governmental interference” (2131).

Conversely, pro-life proponents cite the potential emotional and physical trauma that abortion can cause women, and dissemble loudly that lawmakers and legal scholars know what is best for women, even if they do not know themselves. For instance, Ntontis stresses that, “Abortion is criticized based on its alleged negative psychological impact on women, with some authors voicing concerns related to this medicalized repertoire undermining women’s capacity to act as rational decision-makers” (517). Not surprisingly, this misogynistic and paternalistic argument has been the subject of scorn from the pro-choice community, but it remains unclear at present if and when all American women will ever have this agency legally restored.

III. Abortions and economic factors

From a strictly pragmatic perspective, the argument can be made that unplanned pregnancies can create financial hardships for individuals and families, especially when their current financial situation precludes having children. In fact, the results of a recent study by Foster, Biggs, Ralph et al. found that, “Women denied an abortion were more likely than were women who received an abortion to experience financial hardship and insecurity lasting years. Laws that restrict access to abortion may result in worsened economic outcomes for women” (1291).

Pro-life critics, of course, are having none of this, and counter that all unwanted children can be adopted by loving families. Their woeful lamentations over placing a dollar value on children flies directly in the face of a leaked Supreme Court opinion wherein justices cited a 2008 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that referred to the lagging “domestic supply of infants” for private adoption. It is little wonder that this revelation was met with “a social media outcry,” but “domestic private adoption is estimated to be a multibillion-dollar industry [and] the cost of a typical adoption averages between $20,000 and $45,000 per child” (Madden et al. 428). In other words, this counterargument is not only misguided, it places the interests of the legal profession over women’s right to make choices about their own bodies and lives.

Conclusion

The research showed that the Dobbs decision represents a significant setback for women's reproductive rights in the United States, undermining decades of progress since Roe v. Wade. While anti-abortion advocates emphasize the sanctity of life and argue for state control over abortion laws, the pro-choice stance highlights the importance of bodily autonomy, personal decision-making, and the economic realities that many women face today. By overturning federally protected rights to abortion, the Supreme Court has not only jeopardized the well-being of women but has also paved the way for future encroachments on their personal freedoms. The arguments in favor of legal abortion are compelling and necessary for safeguarding reproductive rights for generations to come.