Aguado 1

Bruno Aguado
Ms. Gardner
English 10 Period 4
7 May 2015
Abortion:
Allowing Womens Rights Denies Oppression
In 1973, the Roe v. Wade case, a case that would determine whether or not women have
the right to an abortion, was settled by the Unites States Supreme Court; in the end, women were
granted the right to an abortion. However, people still fight against the ruling to this day. The
controversial act of aborting a fetus consumed the nation, which is what caused the Supreme
Court to take the case in the first place. The controversy of an abortion is within the action itself;
although the female carrying the unborn child is liberated, the developing fetus is destroyed in
the process, and pro-life groups view this as immoral. Since 50.8% of the United States
population is female as of 2013, according to census.gov, it isnt difficult to see why the matter
of abortion, which is specific to only women, concerns society as a whole. Women should have
the right to an abortion because women shouldnt face negativity for a procedure they wish to
fulfill, women should have insurance coverage for abortion, and the general public want women
to have freedom of choice on this particular subject.
Initially, many would argue that women shouldnt have a right to an abortion because the
fetus is harmed, and ultimately killed, in the process, which denies the rights the pro-life groups
believe a fetus is entitled to. For example, women have been placed under arrest due to falling
down stairs and driving with blood-alcohol levels of just half the legal limit, (Graham) which
are actions that would harm the developing fetus in the woman. Furthermore, Personhood USA

Aguado 2
has helped spark 22 personhood bills and ballot initiatives; while none has passed, in each
ballot vote on personhood, the margin of defeat has declined (Pesta); these bills would give
official rights to any developing fetus. Protesters against a womans right to abortion believe
prohibiting abortion will save the lives of the not-yet born. Indeed, many join the pro-life cause
because they believe prohibiting womens rights to abortion will save lives. However, women are
being imprisoned unjustly for accidentally harming a fetus, and there is still controversy on
whether or not personhood can be applied to something that is unborn.
Admittedly, prohibiting abortion would allow for more people to be born. Nevertheless,
when one realizes how much negativity women go through before being admitted an abortion
procedure, it is impossible to support the prohibition of abortion rights to women. For instance,
under a law signed by Governor Dennis Daugaard last year, women who wish to have an
abortion must wait 72 hours, undergo two visits to physicians to be checked for unspecified
physical and mental risk factors, and be proselytized by an antiabortion counseling center before
they can have the procedure (The Right To Choose). Furthermore, this South Dakota law one of
the 371 pieces of legislation that have been making headway in state capitals during the last few
months . . . seeking to restrict and in some cases all but remove women's access to abortions,
according to the National Abortion Rights Action League (The Right to Choose). Along the
same lines, Idaho, Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama, as well as 10 other states, are beginning to make
abortion illegal after the first 20 weeks of pregnancy have passed. Ohios government is also
considering whether or not to make abortion illegal after the first fetal heartbeat is confirmed,
or after approximately 6 weeks (The Right to Choose). Based on this research, women are
experiencing the beginning of oppression. The act of being tested for mental risk factors is, in
simplest terms, checking to see if the women in question is crazy. This is simply unjust. Wanting

Aguado 3
to have an abortion isnt a symptom of dementia, in the same way that wanting a luxury car isnt
a symptom of greediness. There is no real reason why women should have to go through testing
before going into a process that is already unstable due to the controversy. Soon, women wont
even be able to decide for themselves if they can have an abortion. If women are experiencing
this amount of hatred toward a personal action, why isnt society at least letting the women have
the procedure performed on them?
Going hand-in-hand with the negativity women face when requesting an abortion, what
follows is a hypothetical situation used to simulate what can and does occur. A woman is at the
hospital, drenched in sweat, her face clenched. Shes breathing heavily, trying to get oxygen in
her lungs and strength in her body, attempting to mentally and physically prepare herself for
what is coming. Her husband is right there next to her, trying to support his wife, yet knowing
that there is nothing he can do for her; she will have to go through the final pushes alone. The
doctors in blue scrubs are frantically making sure everything is under control, that the womans
vitals are in check, and that nothing could possibly go wrong to spoil the oncoming miracle. With
a final push, a high-pitched wailing is heard above the commotion of the room, and the new
mother relaxes, sighing in relief, glad that the ordeal of childbirth is over. The husband squeezes
his wifes hand reassuringly as tears of happiness stream down his face. The doctor has a smile
on his face as he hands the child to its mother. She declares the gender: a healthy baby girl with
her fathers small nose and her mothers clear blue eyes. The husband looks into his wife's eyes
and can immediately see that she would go through the entire process again to hold her newborn
child. Now, remove the heartfelt look from the husband; he is no longer next to his wife, yet she
is still pushing, but now she doesnt want to continue. The woman was impregnated after she
was raped by an unknown culprit after locking the doors to her family-owned business. Once the

Aguado 4
woman gives the final push, she cant relax, and there is no reassuring squeeze of the hand, no
tears of joy, no happiness. The doctors smile masks the sorrow he feels for the woman; he also
knows that origin of this pregnancy. He declares the baby to be a healthy boy with his mothers
eyes, but an unknown nose. The new mother will now have to struggle to care for the child that
she never wanted; her family business was on the decline, meaning she was in a financially
unstable place in her life, and now she would have to support another human, one that requires
more care and attention. She had tried to get an abortion in order to not have to deal with the
unnecessary stress she knew she would deal with after the birth, but she was denied the
procedure. Now she will be known as the woman who gave birth to the child of a rapist in
gossip, and shell be seen as less of a standard person of society for an event she couldnt
control, all because she couldnt have an abortion.
Furthermore, research clearly shows women are no longer allowed to be insured for
abortion. To illustrate this, Beth Fouhy of The Associated Press writes [The right to an abortion]
wasnt her [Jelena Woehr] emphasis until Congress began considering potential restrictions on
insurance coverage for abortion. John Seager of The Global Post later confirmed the appalling
news when he reported The US House recently voted to pass a bill designed to terminate private
insurance coverage of abortion in the United States. Obviously, the government is using any
method possible to withhold women from having an abortion; if they have to pay out of their
own pockets, more women will be inclined to stay pregnant. The government isnt even trying to
hide this tactic; they dont have any jargon in their briefcases to try to mask the truth. It was
publicly stated what the US House voted on, and now the public knows the facts; the government
is attempting to strip women of their rights they won so long ago. As a result, it is essential for

Aguado 5
women to achieve the right to an abortion; not only will they be insured for a medical procedure
that may be necessary, they will also have peace of mind while going through their lives.
Ultimately, women should be allowed the right to an abortion due to the majority of the
population agreeing they should. Explicitly, 63 percent of Americans believe that Roe v. Wade
should not be completely overturned, compared to 29 percent who believe it should be
(Wisniewski). Similarly, the only religious group with a majority favoring overturning the Roe v.
Wade case is white evangelical Protestants (Wisniewski). However, large percentages of white
mainline Protestants (76 percent), black Protestants (65 percent) and white Catholics (63 percent)
say the ruling should not be overturned (Wisniewski). Evidently, the numbers provided by the
poll conducted by the Pew Research Center show what the people want; womens rights to an
abortion. The United States is a democracy; because of this, the right for a woman to have an
abortion should be legalized due to the high amount of people who are pro-choice. There is only
a small portion of a religious group that wish to overturn the rule, but almost all other religious
groups believe it is moral to allow the women to decide for themselves whether or not they can
have an abortion performed on them. The government of the United States, which includes state
governments, should therefore put an end to the unfair laws against womens rights to an
abortion and should tear down all pre-standing barriers that shun women who wish an abortion
be performed on them.
Ultimately, it should be a right for women to have an abortion because women shouldnt
be shunned from society for desiring a medical procedure, women shouldnt have to pay out-ofpocket for a procedure that should be covered by insurance, and almost the entire population of
ordinary people want women to have the right to an abortion if they feel the need to have one.
Prohibiting women from getting an abortion would be oppression of a right that was granted 47

Aguado 6
years ago, when the Roe v. Wade case was settled. We must not allow any sort of oppression to
occur, whether it be against race, gender, or abortion.

Works Cited
Fouhy, Beth. "Health Bill Revives Abortion Issue for Young Women." Daily Progress
(Charlottesville, VA). 19 Dec. 2009: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.
Graham, Ruth. "Whose Rights?." Boston Globe. 16 Feb. 2014: K.1. SIRS Issues Researcher.
Web. 20 Apr. 2015.
Pesta, Abigail. "War of the Wombs." Newsweek. 02 Jul. 2012: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher.
Web. 20 Apr. 2015.

Aguado 7
Seager, John. "Unsafe Abortions Kill 47,000 Worldwide As US Politics Block
Remedies." GlobalPost. 05 Feb. 2015: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 24 Apr. 2015.
"The Right to Choose." Los Angeles Times. 01 Apr. 2011: A.12. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web.
20 Apr. 2015.
"United States Census Bureau." USA QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau. N.p., 15
Apr. 2015. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.
Wisniewski, Mary. "As "Roe v. Wade" Turns 40, Most Oppose Reversing Abortion Ruling."
Reuters Media. 16 Jan. 2013: n/a. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.