Legalization of Abortion in Texas

Each year, about 56 million abortions are conducted across the globe (Baum et al 2). The number reflects that there 35million fetuses terminated in every 1,000 ladies aged between 15 and 44 years (Baum et al 2). Although the procedure is common, several countries try to impose legal restrictions that forbid abortion completely or allow doctors to conduct the procedure when the mother is in a life-threatening condition. In the United States of America (USA), abortion was legalized in 1972 (Baum et al 2). Policy restrictions were later formulated at the state-level that imposed barriers to access to the procedure. For instance, some laws are meant to determine the manner through which the operation is offered including Targeted Regulations of Abortion Providers (TRAP) (Baum et al 2). The number of legislations under TRAP has increased and offer directives on the type of medical institution that a person seeking for abortion procedure should attend and the requirements that the physicians must have before they can partake in operation.

Texas executive passed the legislation on adopting TRAP laws in July 2013 (Baum et al 2). By November of the same year, the country implemented three TRAP requirements. Medical practitioners were obligated to acquire admission privileges to healthcare institutions that were 30 miles from the facility in which they provided abortion procedures. Moreover, they were required to adhere to medical abortion protocols approved by the Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) in the USA. Besides, there are some recommended therapeutic dosages for the patients and the procedure should not be conducted on a person whose pregnancy is more than 20 weeks post-fertilization (Baum et al 2). Additionally, abortion facilities were required to meet the standards proposed by ambulatory surgical centers. However, the Supreme Court admitted that the privileges were unconstitutional and that they would burden the women who would face difficulties in accessing abortion while they did not offer benefits on ladies’ health and safety. The move lead to the closure of many clinics and many Texas patients were forced to travel long distances to access abortion services. Moreover, there was a steady increase in the number of abortions conducted in non-hospital facilities. With the legal background on abortion in Texas, this research will uncover the controversies behind the procedure based on the ethical and justice issues that the problem attracts.

The issue of abortion is a fertile ground for scientific and ethical disputes. Medical justifications seek to approve the discipline as a way of justifying the relevance of the procedure (Robertson 1849). Moreover, abortion laws provide a reason for examining the development of legal procedures to resolve the differences that arise among experts. Besides, it is critical to consider the role of scientific assertions to justify abortion policies and laws. From the beginning, biologists claimed that fetuses are live beings (Robertson 1849). However, the suggestion did not mean that children were protected by the also but rather agree on seeking justification that they have human functions. Nevertheless, the biological status of fetuses is still contested since it is not clear they have the moral rights of human persons. The USA Supreme Court ruled that people have the privilege of protection only why they are born. However, states are allowed to safeguard fetuses although they do not have constitutional rights compared to other human beings. Individuals are concerned that Texas seeks to indirectly ban abortions by imposing laws that are difficult to follow. Doctors claim that they conduct the operation to protect the pregnant woman’s safety, health, and autonomy (Robertson 1852). However, some ladies seek an unsafe abortion and most of them die or suffer disabilities due to complications that arise from the procedure. Women claim that they seek abortion due to the failure of family planning programs that do not satisfy their needs to regulate childbearing. Therefore, they assert that legal restrictions should be lifted so that they can seek services from properly trained practitioners. Doctors, on the other hand, claim the FBA should suspend the unnecessary requirements for access to abortion services which is a right for women in the USA. Therefore, courts are not justified to deny people access to the much-needed operation. For instance, the justice system denies ladies an opportunity to have an abortion in the second trimester. Moreover, providers are mandated to collect patients’ details before conducting the procedure. Abortion supporters claim that such laws are meant to undermine peoples’ rights.

Anti-abortion activists in legislative positions continue to advocate for restrictions. Supporters feel that such laws affect people that have limited access to medical services including individuals living with disabilities, youths, and racial and ethnic minority groups. However, anti-abortionists feel that the bans are necessary because they protect unborn children who are vulnerable and cannot make decisions for their lives (Wax-Thibodeaux). They argue that the heartbeat is audible at about six weeks of the pregnancy. Proponents also seek to prevent healthcare centers that conduct the procedure from expanding to other cities. Moreover, they hope to attract legal attention and force the court to reconsider their decisions and ban abortion completely. Besides, the activists claim that people who offer financial assistance and transportation to individuals seeking to go for abortion take part in the unlawful procedure. Greg Hutson an abortion ban activist claims that he is working to fix the problem and urges women to stop killing their children (Wax-Thibodeaux). He further buys a meal for ladies who agree to let the fetus to live and plays a recording containing heartbeat vibrations. Some activists claim that they do not want fetal blood on their hands. In response to the arguments, NARAL an abortion rights movement put a billboard claiming that people should be free to conduct the procedure. They also assert that anti-abortion movements are just pulling a desperate stunt by engaging in illegal advocacy.

Conclusively, abortion is a controversial political issue that is affecting the whole world. Texas is an example of a state that put up measures to minimize unsafe abortions by coming with guidelines that should be adhered to by medical practitioners and patients. However, abortion-rights activists believe that such policies are meant to deny people their freedom of choice and that they should be lifted. Anti-abortion advocates argue that the procedure should be banned completely because it violates human rights. I believe that the laws put up by the Texas government are important because they aim to protect the lives of the patients and keep them away from seeking services from quack practitioners. Therefore, people should be encouraged to follow the laws and seeks abortions only on medical grounds especially when the mothers’ life is at risk. The government should offer education and funding to ensure that residents have equal access to medical care.

Works Cited

Baum, Sarah E., et al. “Women’s experience obtaining abortion care in Texas after implementation of restrictive abortion laws: a qualitative study.” PloS one 11.10 (2016): e0165048.

Robertson, John A. “Science disputes in abortion law.” Tex. L. Rev. 93 (2014): 1849.

Wax-Thibodeaux, Emily. “Anti-Abortion Law Spreads in East Texas as “Sanctuary City for the Unborn” Movement Expands”. The Texas Tribune, 2019, https://www.texastribune.org/2019/10/01/antiabortion-law-spreads-east-texas/.

Order your Copy Today