Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN?

Are Abortion Restrictions in the Best Interest of Women?

Line of Inquiry

Skylar Nuthall

James Madison University

Author Note

This paper was prepared for Critical Reading and Writing 103, Section 0045, with

Professor Fielding.
Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN? 2

Abstract

For decades, abortion has been a sensitive social and political topic, leading to the birth of two

rival parties: Pro-Life and Pro-Choice. People all over the United States of America and other

major countries around the world protest, advocate, and even become aggressive as a result of

conflicting, powerful beliefs. Both parties fight for a similar outcome: what they believe is right.

Throughout the Line of Inquiry essay, research is conducted to determine whether or not

restrictions placed on abortion are in the best interest of women. Three sources, two scholarly

articles and one speech, give information on the history of abortion, opposing sides, organizations,

and possible solutions to calm the controversy. After dissecting each source, different perspectives

are portrayed instead of having a biased, one sided opinion. Within the research, there is a Pro-

life side, a Pro-Choice side, and a neutral side, allowing a fuller understanding of the topic from

all point of views.

Keywords: abortion, restrictions, Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, women, controversy

Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN? 3

Every day, the feeble lives of unborn children are taken as a result of numerous abortions,

leading to the never ending controversy: abortion. An abortion is the intentional termination of an

unborn child, making it an enormous controversial topic today. There are two strongly opposing

viewpoints to the controversy: Pro-Life and Pro-Choice. Pro-life believes that aborting a child is

murder, immoral, and should be illegal, whereas Pro-choice believes it is a womans right to

choose what to do with her body, and taking away that right is unconstitutional. The most

prominent issue related to abortion is whether or not laws and restrictions protect womens rights,

or violate them, impacting women and adolescents in the United States.

Healthcare and Planned Parenthood: The Significance for Pro-Life OB/GYNs, (2017)

by Jeffrey J. Pauls and Carl Landwehr argue that Planned Parenthood is hurting women and

adolescents more than they are helping, and should be put out of business. Pauls and Landwehr

ran an experiment with seventy women who were instructed to go to Planned Parenthood in several

large cities to seek advice about abortion and birth control. Their findings from the study are that

the organization over emphasizes the effectiveness of birth control to adolescents and women, also

as women begin to mature, Planned Parenthood loses its appeal and leads them to a doctor, such

as an OB/GYN. Also, studies state that women who are affected by unplanned pregnancy seek

abortions to protect themselves and their future, leading them to the organization. Planned

Parenthood has women take surveys before the procedure that are lengthy and extremely bias in

Pro-Choices favor. Adolescents and women, therefore are frightened and led believe that abortion

is the only option for them. Additionally, instead of referring to the unborn child as a baby, fetus,

or child, they dehumanize the child, referring to it as a glob of cells or product of

contraception. After the procedure, women are emotionally unstable and struggle tremendously

for the rest of their lives with what they have done. Planned Parenthood does not provide them
Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN? 4

with any long term counseling or support, and leave them to handle the situation on their own.

Pauls and Landwehr conclude that with all of the lacking and unsafe elements of Planned

Parenthood, it reveals the value of Pro-Life OB/GYNs, and how effective and safe it is for women

and adolescents to seek their assistance.

In her speech, The Ability for One to Define Ones Existence, (2008) Nadine Strossen

speaks to Malone College about whether or not abortion is morally and legally right. She states

that although she is on the Pro-Choice side to abortion, she understands the opposing side too.

Also, that the difference between the two viewpoints should not be the focus of discussion. The

focus should be on lowering United States unplanned pregnancies by embracing and enhancing

sexual education and making contraceptives widely available to everyone. If abortion was made

illegal, it would still happen, but in an illegal manner causing unsafe and possibly life threatening

side effects to women. Strossen continues to argue that religious beliefs and morals cannot not

interfere with constitutional rights of women, and they have the right to maintain full information

about reproduction. She concludes that both extremes, making abortion illegal and removing

restrictions, are clearly unreasonable, therefore, people should work together to solve the larger

problem of unintended pregnancies.

Abortion (2010), contends information about the history of abortion, significance of

Supreme Court cases on abortion laws and restrictions, Pro-life movements and violence, partial

birth abortions, and Planned Parenthood. In the late 1800s, abortion was not allowed, leading

women to seek illegal and unsafe abortions that cause serious health issues, complications, and

death. As a reaction, women began to fight back. Several Supreme Court cases took place such

as Roe vs. Wade in 1973, Doe vs. Bolton in 1973, Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services in

1989, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania vs. Casey in 1991, and Planned
Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN? 5

Parenthood vs. Danforth in 1976. In each of these cases that reached the Supreme Court, women

fought for what they believed in, whether it was from the Pro-Life or Pro-Choice point of view.

Due to conflicting perspectives of the two sides, several court cases and laws have been over turned

as a result of them violating constitutional rights. Abortion also briefly touches on partial birth

abortion restrictions, the Pro-Choice organization of Planned Parenthood, and Pro-Life movements

along with their violence and regulations. The article concludes that abortion has been a

controversy for over one hundred years, and cases will continue to be brought to the Supreme

Court in attempt to solve the on-going issue.

Within the article Healthcare and Planned Parenthood: The Significance for Pro-Life

OB/GYNs, Pauls and Landwehr strongly oppose to Planned Parenthood because of its lack of

safety for women, but Strossens speech, The Ability for One to Define Ones Existence, takes

a slightly different viewpoint on the issue by proposing a solution to solve the problem, satisfying

both parties. Pauls and Landwehr believe Planned Parenthood is more harmful, than helpful to

women, and that Pro-Life OB/GYNs are a safer, healthier, and more efficient option for women

seeking help or information about abortion. They extend their argument stating the organization

encourages women to go through with abortions, but then leaves them and adolescents traumatized

with no support system or counselling. Planned Parenthood does not do adequate pre- or post-

abortion counseling to address the damage done to many women, especially in the areas of

emotional, social and spiritual health. If they were to offer post abortion counseling, it would be

an admission that abortion causes harm to women (Pauls & Landwehr, 2017, 320). The safety of

women is most important; therefore, women who are attempting to seek help or an abortion, should

see an OB/GYN. Strossen is not on the Pro-Life side and argues that regardless the circumstances,

all women still maintain their full right to reproductive freedom, which makes banning abortion
Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN? 6

unconstitutional. She states that regardless the differences in beliefs, the most crucial objective is

to ensure the safety of women, connecting her speech to Pauls and Landwehrs article. Why

shouldnt we all support measures that would make abortion safe, legal, accessible, and rare?,

she asks during her speech (Strossen, 2008). Both Strossen and Pauls and Landwehr want to ensure

that women are safe, although they maintain different viewpoints on controversy.

Strossens speech, The Ability for One to Define Ones Existence, and the informative

article, Abortion, maintain the similarity of actively attempting to solve the everlasting issue of

abortion. The speech given to Malone College in 2008, states that morals, religious beliefs, and

personal viewpoints cannot interfere with civil rights, but also that making positive changes will

help lower unintended pregnancies. Abortion focuses on the numerous Supreme Court cases

that attempt to solve abortion and violence. Mentioned in both sources is the American Civil

Liberties Union, ACLU, and the Supreme Court Case, Planned Parenthood vs. Casey. The

Ability for One to Define Ones Existence explains that ACLU represented Planned Parenthood

by ensuring a womans constitutional right to choose abortion in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey

(Strossen, 2008). Planned Parenthood vs. Casey argued that women need consent from their

husbands before aborting a child, but regulations later state that it violated a womansright to

choose whether to terminate her pregnancy (Abortion, 2010, p. 18). Strossens speech and

Abortion, argue and support that it is, by law, a womans right to obtain an abortion. They

conclude that having the opportunity to choose whether or not a woman wants to seek an abortion

is in her best interest. Also, nothing should come between women and their reproductive freedom

giving to them by the United States Constitution.

Jeffery J. Pauls and Carl Landwehrs article, Healthcare and Planned Parenthood: The

Significance for Pro-Life OB/GYNs argues why Pro-Life OB/GYNs are the overall best option
Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN? 7

for women and how the Pro-Choice organization, Planned Parenthood, has a long term, negative

impact on women. In contrast, Abortion claims that Pro-Life and anti-abortionist are extremely

violent in their movements, and Planned Parenthood is a solely productive organization. Pro-Life

OB/GYNs have the opportunity to research the psychological and emotional responses of women

toward abortion and the psychological and emotional state of a woman facing an unexpected

pregnancy, whereas Planned Parenthood only makes a woman un-pregnant and sends her back

to a dysfunctional social environment (Pauls and Landwehr, 2017, p. 320). Abortion further

explains Pro-Life supporters are not productive like they make themselves out to be, and instead

are unusually violent. Bombings, arson, and even murder have been committed by anti-abortion

activists in the name of their cause (Abortion, 2010, p. 23). Also, as a result of their aggressive

behavior, President Bill Clinton in 1994 signed a law that allows forprosecution of anyone

who, by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates, or

interfereswith any personobtaining or providing reproductive health services (Abortion,

2010, p. 24). Pro-Life activists and Pro-Choice organizations reveal obvious contrasting beliefs,

and continue to portray the opposing party as flawed and unbeneficial to women.

As previously mentioned, Strossens speech is primarily neutral with a purpose to solve

the vast problem, rather than choose sides, but Pauls and Landwehrs article on Pro-Life OB/GYNs

bashes Planned Parenthood for being pro-abortion. She states, too many in the pro-life

movementsupport laws that endanger womens health and lives by seeking to

outlawabortionsnecessary to save the health or lives of pregnant women (Strossen, 2008).

Pro-Life is close minded to the idea that abortion could save lives, and only focus on the idea that

abortion is murdering unborn children and ruining lives of women and adolescents, rather than

making attempts to solve unplanned pregnancies. Pauls and Landwehr believe that Pro-Life
Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN? 8

OB/GYNS can effectively compete with Planned Parenthood and eventually put them out of

business (Pauls and Landwehr, 2017, p. 324). Strossen is able to realize the reason why abortion

an issue, and speaks on how it can be solved, rather than Healthcare and Planned Parenthood:

The Significance for Pro-Life OB/GYNs, idea of putting Planned Parenthood out of business to

solve the problem of abortion. By putting Planned Parenthood out of business, all of the good they

contribute will no longer be available to women in need, and will only cause a larger problem for

women and extend the controversy.

Throughout researching abortion, I was enlightened on the pros and cons of Pro-Life and

Pro-Choice, Planned Parenthood, history of abortion, Supreme Court cases directly related to

abortion laws and restrictions, and the major impact an abortion can have on women and

adolescents. As a result, I believe that my personal viewpoints on abortion restrictions have

changed. Due to my previous belief that abortion should be illegal, now, my belief is that abortion

should be the womans choice. The opportunity to seek an abortion should not be taken away, if

it is in her best interest, especially with situations where women are raped or where incest causes

unplanned pregnancy. In cases like these, abortions are the correct course of action. The first

source researched was most effective in reinforcing my previous stand point. Healthcare and

Planned Parenthood: The Significance for Pro-Life OB/GYNs concludes that Planned Parenthood

is the wrong choice when seeking help, information, support, or an abortion because Pro-Life

OB/GYNs are safer and more appropriate for women and adolescents. The organization of

Planned Parenthood is said to be more hurtful than helpful towards women due to its lack of

knowledge, expertise, and lack of emotional support post-abortion. Strossens speech contributed

a neutral viewpoint to the research by her placing the opposing viewpoints on the issue, and asking

the audience to focus on the larger picture: lowering unplanned pregnancies. She proposes that
Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN? 9

sexual education should be focused on more heavily and contraceptives be made available to all,

resulting in a decrease of unintended pregnancies. The last article researched, Abortion,

provides significant background and factual information on the controversy. By including

Supreme Court cases, history of abortion, and the negative side to Pro-Life movements, it opens

up a different prospective to the ongoing issue, but also claims that abortion can never be resolved.
Running head: ARE ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WOMEN? 10

References

Abortion. (2010). In D. Batten (Ed.), Gale encyclopedia of american law (3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 13-

27). Detroit: Gale.

Pauls, J. J., & Landwehr, C. (2017). Healthcare and Planned Parenthood: The significance for

pro-life OB/GYNs. Issues in Law & Medicine, 32(2), 315-324.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=125384609&site=ehos

t-live&scope=site

Strossen, N. (2008, January 31). The Heart of Liberty. Speech at Malone College Worldview

Forum, Canton, OH.