Abortion
The debate whether abortion should be a legal has long divided people around the world. Split into two groups, pro-choice and pro-life, the two sides frequently clash in the United States.
Explore the ProCon debate
Early History
Abortion techniques were developed as early as 1550 bce, when the ancient Egyptian medical text, the Ebers papyrus, suggested that the vaginal insertion of plant fiber covered with honey and crushed dates could induce an abortion. In fact, abortion was an accepted practice in ancient Greece and Rome. Greek philosopher Aristotle (384–322 bce) wrote that “when couples have children in excess, let abortion be procured before sense and life have begun.” In the latter days of the Roman Empire, abortion was not considered murder but a crime against the father who would be deprived of a potential child. [86][87]
Throughout much of Western history, abortion was not considered a criminal act as long as it was performed before “quickening” (the first detectable movement of the fetus, which can occur between 13–25 weeks of pregnancy). American states derived their initial abortion statutes from British common law, which followed this principle. Until at least the early 1800s, abortion procedures and methods were legal and openly advertised throughout the United States. Abortion was unregulated, however, and often not only unsafe for the woman but fatal.[86][88][89][90][91][106]
In 1821, Connecticut became the first U.S. state to criminalize abortion. The state banned the selling of an abortion-inducing “poison,” but it did not punish those who took the poison. Legal consequences began in 1845 when New York criminalized a woman’s participation in her abortion, regardless of whether it took place before or after “quickening.” In the mid-1800s, early pro-life advocate Dr. Horatio Robinson Storer (1830–1922) convinced the American Medical Association to join him in campaigning for the outlawing of abortion nationwide. By the early 1900s, most states had banned abortion. By 1965, all 50 states had outlawed abortion, with some exceptions varying by state. [41][42][90][92]
The motivation behind these early abortion laws has been disputed. Some writers argue that the laws were not aimed at preserving the lives of unborn children but rather were intended to protect women from unsafe abortion procedures, or to allow the medical profession to take over responsibility for women’s health from untrained practitioners. Others say that pro-life concerns were already prevalent and were a major influence behind the efforts to ban abortion. [86][90][93]
Roe, Casey, and Dobbs
Beginning on January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling protected abortion rights nationally by declaring most state anti-abortion laws unconstitutional. The Supreme Court’s 7-2 decision established rules based on a pregnancy trimester framework, banning legislative interference in the first trimester of pregnancy (0–12 weeks), allowing states to regulate abortion during the second trimester (weeks 13–28) “in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health,” and allowing a state to “regulate, and even proscribe” abortion during the third trimester (weeks 29–40) “in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life,” unless an abortion is required to preserve the life or health of the mother. The decision also allowed states to prohibit abortions performed by anyone who is not a state-licensed physician. [49][95]
Roe was reinforced by the June 29, 1992, decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, which upheld the constitutional right to have an abortion but abandoned the “rigid trimester framework” outlined in Roe v. Wade, adopting a less restrictive standard for state regulations. The decision enabled states to impose waiting periods before an abortion could be obtained, allowed some legislative interference in the first trimester in the interest of health, and permitted parental consent requirements for minors seeking abortions. The Court ruled that none of these conditions imposed an “undue burden” upon those seeking abortions, but some pro-choice advocates warned that Roe v. Wade had been significantly weakened and that states would limit abortion access. [57][107][108][109]
With the national debate still raging, both Roe and Casey were overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on June 24, 2022, in a 6-3 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. The ruling did not outlaw abortion in the United States, but it eliminated the federal constitutional right to abortion, allowing states to ban or regulate the procedure individually. [273][274][275]
Pro-Choice and Pro-Life groups
Some prominent pro-choice organizations include Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the National Abortion Federation, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the National Organization for Women. Although many pro-life positions derive from religious ideology, several mainstream faith groups support the pro-choice movement, such as the United Methodist Church, United Church of Christ, the Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), and the Unitarian Universalist Association. [169][170]
The 2020 Democratic Party Platform endorsed the pro-choice position, stating: “Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights, and justice. We believe unequivocally, like the majority of Americans, that every woman should be able to access high-quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion. We will repeal the Title X domestic gag rule and restore federal funding for Planned Parenthood, which provides vital preventive and reproductive health care for millions of people, especially low-income people, and people of color, and LGBTQ+ people, including in underserved areas.” [169][170]
Some prominent pro-life organizations include The National Right to Life Committee, Pro-Life Action League, Operation Rescue, the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Americans United for Life, the National Association of Evangelicals, Family Research Council, Christian Coalition of America, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon Church). [6][170][171]
The 2016 Republican Party Platform (which was not updated in 2020) opposed abortion, stating: “We oppose the use of public funds to perform or promote abortion or to fund organizations, like Planned Parenthood, so long as they provide or refer for elective abortions or sell fetal body parts rather than provide healthcare. . . . We will not fund or subsidize healthcare that includes abortion coverage. . . . We thank and encourage providers of counseling, medical services, and adoption assistance for empowering women experiencing an unintended pregnancy to choose life.” [6][170][171]
While “pro-choice” and “pro-life” have long been the mainstream terms, some prefer “pro-abortion” and “anti-abortion,” either to clarify or scorn the position of the opposing group.
Contemporary Abortion Procedures
A surgical abortion, also called a procedural abortion, is performed in the first trimester of a pregnancy and involves dilating (enlarging) the cervix (the narrow opening of the uterus) and then removing the contents of the uterus with suction and a scraping tool called a curette; this procedure is often called D&C (for dilation and curettage), commonly performed after miscarriages. Surgical abortions performed later in pregnancy (typically during the second trimester, between weeks 13-26) are called D&E (dilation and evacuation), and they take slightly longer to perform, utilize additional instruments, and can incur more risks than a D&C. Late-term abortions (also called “partial-birth” abortions outside of the medical profession) are banned in the U.S. (except when necessary to save the life of the mother) and dubbed D&X (for dilation and extraction). [81][82]
A medical abortion (the “abortion pill”) involves taking medications, usually mifepristone and misoprostol, within the first seven to nine weeks of pregnancy to induce an abortion. [39]
“Plan B” is an emergency contraceptive, not an abortion drug: the pill “will not work if you’re already pregnant, and will not affect an existing pregnancy,” explains the FDA; it prevents pregnancy before it starts by temporarily delaying ovulation.[290]
So, should abortion be legal in the United States? Explore the debate below.
Pros and Cons at a Glance
PROS | CONS |
---|---|
Pro 1: Abortion is a safe medical procedure that protects lives. Read More. | Con 1: Life begins at conception, making abortion murder. Read More. |
Pro 2: Abortion bans endanger healthcare for those not seeking abortions. Read More. | Con 2: Legal abortion promotes a culture in which life is disposable. Read More. |
Pro 3: Abortion bans deny bodily autonomy and have wide-ranging repercussions. Read More. | Con 3: Better access to birth control, health insurance, and sexual education would make abortion unnecessary. Read More. |
Pro 4: Abortion is a fundamental human right warranting national legalization; its legality should not be left to the discretion of U.S. states. Read More. | Con 4: Abortion should not be legal where it is not desired; it’s too contentious an issue to be nationally legalized. Read More. |
Pro Arguments
(Go to Con Arguments)Pro 1: Abortion is a safe medical procedure that protects lives.
The death rate for legal abortions is 0.7 deaths for every 100,000 abortions. By contrast, there are one to two deaths per 100,000 plastic surgery procedures, three deaths for every 100,000 colonoscopies, and three to six deaths per 100,000 tonsillectomies. Childbirth has nine deaths per 100,000 deliveries. [236]
The “abortion pill” (Mifeprex) has a better safety record than common over-the-counter drugs including Tylenol, as well as prescriptions like penicillin and Viagra. Medication abortion (a combination of Mifeprex and misoprostol) has a mortality rate of 6.5 deaths per one million patients. [237][238]
Pregnancy-related maternal deaths could increase 20 percent in U.S. states with abortion bans. Amanda Stevenson, sociology professor at the University of Colorado, Boulder, explained, “People with resources are more likely to make it out of state or find out about medication abortions. People who can’t are more likely to have health issues, to live in poverty and have less access to resources.” People of color are especially likely to be in the latter category and, thus, negatively impacted by abortion bans. [239]
The predicted 20 percent maternal death rate does not include those who will die from “back alley” or illegal abortions because legal options were not available. [239]
Globally 45 percent of abortions are unsafe, 97 percent of which take place in developing countries with strict abortion laws. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), “Evidence shows that restricting access to abortions does not reduce the number of abortions; however, it does affect whether the abortions that women and girls attain are safe and dignified. The proportion of unsafe abortions are significantly higher in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws than in countries with less restrictive laws.” [240]
Pro 2: Abortion bans endanger healthcare for those not seeking abortions.
Medical treatment for nonviable pregnancies is often exactly the same as an abortion. [241][242][243]
Ectopic pregnancies occur when a fertilized egg implants somewhere other than the uterine cavity. About one in 50 pregnancies are ectopic, and they are nonviable. Bleeding from ectopic pregnancies caused 10 percent of all pregnancy-related deaths, and ectopic pregnancies were the leading cause of maternal death in the first trimester. [241][244][245][246]
Other pregnancies can be nonviable, including when there is little or no chance of the baby’s survival once it is born or if the baby has died in utero. The treatment for ectopic and other nonviable pregnancies is often the same as that for an abortion. [243][247]
One out of every ten pregnancies ends in miscarriage. The drugs used for medication abortions are the only treatment recommended for early miscarriages. For later or complicated miscarriages, the same surgical procedure used for abortions is recommended. [242]
While some abortion bans include specific exceptions for nonviable pregnancies and miscarriages, other bans are too vague to be practicable. Healthcare providers may refuse to perform a procedure that could be interpreted as an “on-demand” abortion for fear of liability or prosecution. [248]
Arguing that doctors and others use them as loopholes for “on demand” abortions, lobbyists are working to eliminate exceptions altogether, which would further endanger and traumatize people seeking care for dangerous medical conditions. [246][248]
Some pharmacists have refused to fill prescriptions for miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies, because the drugs can also be used for abortion. In Texas, pharmacists can be sued for “aiding and abetting” an abortion. [242][245]
Further, bans are a slippery slope to contraceptive and other healthcare restrictions. For example, some already incorrectly view Plan B (the morning after pill) as an abortifacient and are thinking of including it in abortion bans. [249]
Pro 3: Abortion bans deny bodily autonomy and have wide-ranging repercussions.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen stated, “eliminating the rights of women to make decisions about when and whether to have children would have very damaging effects on the economy and would set women back decades.... In many cases, abortions are of teenage women, particularly low-income and often Black, who aren’t in a position to be able to care for children, have unexpected pregnancies, and it deprives them of the ability often to continue their education to later participate in the workforce.” [250]
After being denied an abortion, household poverty increased and lasted four or more years, resulting in an inability to cover basic expenses including food, housing, and transportation. A denied abortion was associated with a lowered credit score, increased debt, and an increase in negative public records including evictions and bankruptcies. The households were also more reliant on government assistance. Transgender and nonbinary people denied abortions may face even worse outcomes. [251][252][253]
Some 60 percent of women seeking abortions already had other children. Being denied an abortion worsened the well-being of their older children, including not meeting childhood development markers. [251]
Women denied an abortion were also more likely to have serious health complications, have poor physical and mental health for years afterward, and stay with abusive partners. They were more likely to be raising their children alone five years later. [251][254]
The Turnaway Study concluded, “Abortion does not harm women,” and “Women who receive a wanted abortion are more financially stable, set more ambitious goals, raise children under more stable conditions, and are more likely to have a wanted child later.” [251][254][255]
Pro 4: Abortion is a fundamental human right warranting national legalization; its legality should not be left to the discretion of U.S. states.
Leaving an issue like abortion to the discretion of U.S. states is not only an insult to women but a sure way of creating laws that are confusing, discriminatory, and ineffective. Amnesty International stated, “Laws and policies that affect the lives of all persons who can become pregnant must ensure access to abortion and full bodily autonomy. Laws restricting access to safe abortion violate the human rights of women and people who can get pregnant.” [325]
In fact, many Americans do not know the abortion laws in their state. According to a KFF (formerly Kaiser Family Foundation) poll, approximately 50 percent of adults and 41 percent of women aged 18 to 49 were “unsure” whether medical abortion (the most common abortion method) is legal where they live. Plus, 13 percent of adults wrongly believed medical abortion is legal where they live. [317]
Ashley Kirzinger of KFF explained, “The majority of Americans aren’t paying that close attention to [abortion laws]. They’re hearing murmurs and rumors based on media coverage. Until they need to access it, it’s not something they’re thinking about.” The state-by-state approach to abortion laws leaves Americans confused.[318]
Allowing each state to establish abortion laws, as is the case in the United States now, “create[s] a patchwork in which some states provide reproductive freedom and equal citizenship for people who can become pregnant while others don’t,” according to the League of Women Voters. That patchwork is discriminatory, denying equal access to medical care to about 40 percent (approximately 25 million) of American women of reproductive age who lived in states with abortion bans as of June 2023. Either everyone should have access to abortion, or no one should.[316][319]
The laws are also ineffective. As of January 7, 2024, abortion laws in the United States range from full legality with no gestational limits to full bans in which no abortion is legal—abortions are even criminalized in some states. This patchwork of laws means that a pregnant person who lives in New Mexico is legally allowed to have an abortion. However, a person living in Texas on the border with New Mexico may be able to simply cross the border to obtain an abortion in New Mexico, even though Texas has a near total ban. Others may travel hours to get an abortion in a legal state. However, state-hopping leaves clinics in legal states so overwhelmed that they may not be able to serve their resident patients.
Pro Quotes
Ylonda Gault, director of editorial strategy and services at Planned Parenthood and author of Child, Please
If our constitutional right to safe, legal abortion is not upheld, more than 25 million Americans of reproductive age could lose the freedom to decide when and if to have a child…
This is not complicated or political. When you have bodily autonomy and the freedom to get the health care you want, need and deserve, your whole world changes and you are able to thrive…
My abortion is a part of me, my story. And I have no shame that I made the best decision for myself, my family and our future. [341]
Richard A.S. Hall, professor of philosophy at Fayetteville State University
Let me say outright: A woman has an inalienable moral and legal right to abortion at any stage of her pregnancy. No politician, judge, nor cleric, and certainly no man, ought to tell a woman what she ought or ought not to do with her body.
It is sufficient justification for a woman to abort her fetus if she desires to do so, even if her desire is nothing more than a whim. Abortion is strictly a matter between her and her gynecologist with even her husband or whoever impregnated her having no say in the matter.
Abortion is a moral issue and should not be a legal or political one. More fundamentally, it is a metaphysical issue over whether a fetus is a bona fide person with rights, among them, preeminently, the right to life. But resolving this issue depends on what constitutes a person—what it is to be a person, and at what stage, if any, does the fetus become a person.
Now there is no scientific resolution to this issue only a metaphysical or philosophical one. What, then, constitutes personhood? I think most would agree that the minimal qualifications for being a person are consciousness, and the capacities for communication through language or other means and for introspection.
A fetus at any stage of its development obviously lacks these and other personal attributes and so does not qualify as a person in any sense; consequently, it lacks any moral or legal rights since such belong exclusively to persons. [342]
Con Arguments
(Go to Pro Arguments)Con 1: Life begins at conception, making abortion murder.
Conception is the moment a sperm cell fertilizes an egg cell, which begins the process of cell division that creates a human. [256]
As Tara Sander Lee, senior fellow and director of life sciences at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, states, “life begins from the moment of conception when the sperm fertilizes the egg, because there is the creation of a new, totally distinct, integrated organism or a human being, which is going to be biologically distinct from all other life forms on this planet.” The first cell is biologically distinct because it has its own DNA that is different from either biological parent and all other humans. [257]
Ending a life is murder, legally and ethically, even a life that is only a few growing cells at the time of death.
“Abortion is murder,” explained Pope Francis. “Those who carry out abortions kill….At the third week after conception, often even before the mother is aware (of being pregnant), all the organs are already (starting to develop). It is a human life. Period. And this human life has to be respected. It is very clear.… Scientifically, it is a human life.” [258]
That people may face difficulties without abortion as an option does not excuse or justify murder. A reader of The Atlantic, who gave only the initial K., clarified the moral dilemma: “I wish that I could be pro-choice because the awful circumstances so many women face—that I can’t even imagine facing—seem so much more real to me than the rights of a fetus who doesn’t even always look human. But abortion is the intentional killing of a human being and we look back with horror at anyone in history who decided a group of people did not actually count as people. We cannot solve the problem of injustice against women with more injustice. We need solutions that support women without killing fetuses.” [295]
Con 2: Legal abortion promotes a culture in which life is disposable.
Echoing a 2014 remark by Pope Francis that connected abortion to “throwaway culture,” Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, stated, “abortion represents a failure to recognize the sanctity of human life and promotes a culture in which human life in its most vulnerable moment is perceived as disposable. Such a proposal targets poor women as needing an expedient solution to a complex problem.”[260]
Tobin previously declared legal abortion a “brutalization of the American heart” on par with the “dehumanization of the undocumented” immigrants. [261]
Alveda King, former Georgia state representative and niece of Martin Luther King, Jr., also connected abortion to other societal ills: “Abortion and racism are both symptoms of a fundamental human error. The error is thinking that when someone stands in the way of our wants, we can justify getting that person out of our lives. Abortion and racism stem from the same poisonous root, selfishness. We create the deceptions that the other person is less important, less worthy, less human. We are all fully human. When we face this truth, there is no justification for treating those who look different than us as lesser beings. If we simply treat other people the way we’d like to be treated, racism, abortion, and other forms of inhumanity will be things of the past.” [262]
As King notes, some fetuses are treated as less than human. This ideology combined with legal abortion could create a slippery slope to designer babies, gender selection, termination of disabled but healthy fetuses, and other trait-selection-based abortions. The slippery slope can then extend to people with mental disabilities and the elderly in general. [262]
“[A]bortion is an act rife with the potential for eugenic manipulation,” according to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. “Technological advances have only heightened the eugenic potential for abortion, as abortion can now be used to eliminate children with unwanted characteristics, such as a particular sex or disability.” [263]
Instead of disposing of a life, Adoption Choice explained, “If you’re …. not prepared to raise a child, adoption is the right choice for you …. One of biggest advantages of choosing adoption is the ability to still be a part of your child’s life. Many birth mothers are able to stay in contact with the adoptive family and their child through open adoption .… Birthmothers can be reassured that their child is loved and well-cared for and can be reassured that their decision to make an adoption plan was the right one. [326]
Con 3: Better access to birth control, health insurance, and sexual education would make abortion unnecessary.
Abortion rates in the United States have fallen at what the CDC called a “slow yet steady pace” since a peak in 1981. That year there were 29.3 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44. The rate fell to 11.4 abortions per 1,000 women in 2019. [264][265]
Experts largely contribute the decline in abortions in the United States and elsewhere to the improved safety and availability of LARC (long-acting reversible contraception) including IUDs and contraceptive implants that can last up to 10 years. [264][266][267]
Access to health insurance to pay for contraceptives also contributed to a drop in abortions. With the passage of Obamacare (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), more people were insured with access to free or low-cost contraceptives and reproductive care. [264]
Linda Rosenstock, public health professor at UCLA, summarized the simplicity of the connection: “In the United States each year, about half of pregnancies are unintended and about 40 percent of those lead to abortion. Access to birth control leads to fewer abortions.” [264]
Further, teens are having sex later in life than their parents. 38.4 percent of American high schoolers reported they have had sex (down from 54 percent in 1991) and only 27.4 percent reported they were currently sexually active (37.5 percent in 1991). [268]
Because teen birth control use has not increased significantly, experts attribute the decline in part to better sex education. A 2021 study found that students who received comprehensive sexual education initiated sex later than students who did not participate in sex ed. The later teens have sex, the less chance there is for them to become pregnant unintentionally, which leads to fewer abortions. [264][268][269]
Historically, abortion was a popular means of birth control and family planning due to a lack of reliable contraception, education, and other resources, and the fact that childbirth was incredibly dangerous. Better options are now available, including more effective birth control, better healthcare and health insurance, and sex education to ensure an unwanted pregnancy does not happen in the first place. [264][270]
Con 4: Abortion should not be legal where it is not desired; it’s too contentious an issue to be nationally legalized.
Americans forget that the United States is huge. Texas would be the 39th largest country in the world in terms of land mass. California has the world’s 5th largest economy; it even exceeds the population of Canada. And Florida has a population that only slightly trails Taiwan. Within each of these states is a multitude of cultures, making up the famed “melting pot” that is the United States. [320][321][322]
On issues like abortion where there is enormous, polarizing disagreement between cultural and religious groups, age ranges, genders, political parties, and other groups, the legality of the action should be left to the states, where populations are often more homogenous and residents have more control over their legislatures. President Donald Trump explained, “My view is now that we have abortion where everyone wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation, or perhaps both. And whatever they decide must be the law of the land. In this case, the law of the state.” He continued, “Many states will be different. Many will have a different number of weeks, or some will have more conservative than others, and that’s what they will be. At the end of the day, this is all about the will of the people.” [323]
Pro-life and pro-choice advocates may scoff at this assertion, but the numbers support it. Seven states—Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and West Virginia—where 55 percent or more residents say abortion should not be legal have restrictive abortion laws, including some or all of the following: an in-person or telephone counseling session, a waiting period, a mandated ultrasound, admitting privileges, and a ban on abortion extending to all or parts of the first trimester. [324]
Meanwhile, 21 states where support for legal abortion is 55 percent or higher have almost no restrictions in place, and in the 22 states where there is no clear majority opinion, there is also no clear pattern in abortion laws—their laws instead vary based on previous regulations and the officials elected to office. [324]
Furthermore, when abortion laws are left to the states, the laws can change based on the will of the voters. If a state’s population shifts majority opinion one way or the other, the elected officials and laws can more easily change in tandem, over time, to reflect the shift in public opinion. Decentralizing contentious issues like abortion is the most democratic way of handling them.