Abortion legislation has long been a topic of debate in the U.S. political arena. Recent developments suggest legislation is growing more conservative towards abortion laws. This is specifically true in regards to what is legally considered an ample amount of time to allow for an abortion following conception, as well as whether abortion should be covered under health insurance, both public and private. While each state has taken it upon itself to regulate abortion based on federally constituted mandates, there are some conservative states run predominantly by Republican officials that are not proposing state laws that actually challenge federal laws regulating abortion.
Abortion is legal in some states like in America where they are concerned for women who are raped, get pregnant, and later give birth to a child. Therefore, women are allowed to make the choice of either giving birth to the baby or not. According to the most common current legislation, these women are allowed to decide what they can do with their bodies since they are recognized as fully developed human beings, while the personhood of the embryo is not recognized or established by law. The government has a lawful concern in protecting the embryo’s life; however, the fetuses and embryos themselves do not have rights until they are determined as human persons. This is in the case of Roe v. Wade. Roe V. Wade’s central force that women should make the decision to abort until the fetus can have its own right when it is old enough (Mcbride, Dorothy 61).
The most recent development in the abortion controversy is the fact that North Dakota Governor Jack Dalrymple has signed a bill which makes North Dakota abortion legislation the most restrictive and actually caused a U.S. Supreme Court challenge of “the boundaries of Roe v. Wade (Keen, 1).” The New York Times noted that this change in North Dakota’s abortion policy challenges the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on abortion because it fundamentally changes what recognizes an embryo as a person. This distinction makes all the difference in whether a woman has a say in what they can or cannot do with their bodies upon conception. This has long been a debate again pro-choice and anti-choice legislation. On the new law recently proposed by Dalrymple and passed by a predominantly Republican state congress in North Dakota, Eligon and Eckholm of The New York Times noted that “Mr. Dalrymple, a Republican, signed three bills passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature in Bismarck. The most far-reaching law forbids abortion once a fetal heartbeat is “detectable,” which can be as early as six weeks into a pregnancy. Fetal heartbeats are detectable at that stage of pregnancy using a transvaginal ultrasound (Eligon & Eckholm, 1).” This is an aggressive use of policy and could mean a national transition from women being able to request an abortion within four months or not being able to beyond six weeks. Likewise, on political fronts in Virginia, legislation is changing to make it so healthcare will no longer cover abortion.
In America, there are over millions of abortions performed every year, whereby very many pregnancies end up in abortion (Wetstein, Matthew, 1996). This has as well caused the deaths of many women, young people, especially, who miss millions of their mates in abortion. Pro-life activists warned that abortion would be a deadly risk that would target a definite population, and abortion has proved exactly that. These operations can also get very costly. In Virginia, the policy is changing to make the process even more costly. In The Washington Post article on Virginian policy, Vozzella notes that “RICHMOND — Health plans offered to Virginians through federal insurance exchanges could not cover most abortions under amendments that Gov. Robert F. McDonnell has proposed to two General Assembly bills (Vozzella, 1).”
This would most likely limit abortion as an option for individuals who could not afford it, specifically those who could also not raise their children. The bills specifically designed to limit abortion through increasing costs for potential individuals included, “two years ago, the General Assembly voted to prohibit abortion coverage in any insurance policies sold under any state-based insurance exchange set up under the federal Affordable Care Act (Vozzella, 1).” This would be a victory for ant-prochoice activists, as it would significantly limit abortion as an option for a large majority of individuals considering it.
Every year, approximately 1.4 million babies are aborted in America, while only 4 million babies on average are born (Wetstein, Matthew, 16). This number is very big, and so legalization of abortion has overruled the fact that society should take care of the lives of innocent children. Several measures have led public health officials policymakers and the general public to center changed attention on the data of abortion in the U.S. State legislators and federal, regulatory agencies and courts can seriously impact contact to abortion care for women. Recently, Congress banned the procedures of safe abortion and selected to make a fetus a person and controlled abortion for employees federal, Native American, military dependents, and low-income women. In the branch of the Executive, President Bush nominated 200 and more judgers who were anti-choice judges, and they were nominated to the federal bench. In the courts, the Supreme Court has been challenging the essential right to legal and safe abortion. The NAF, public policy information provides details and skilled insight, as well as, ensuring that the voices of patients and abortion providers in a policy forum are heard (Lee, Ellie, 2003)…