Since the landmark Supreme Court decision in the Roe v. Wade case of 1973, US politics has been split. The decision extended the right to privacy over a woman’s choice to have an abortion as long as it took into account the woman’s health and the viability of the fetus to live outside of the confines of the womb. Thus, a key part of the Roe v. Wade decision was to prevent third-trimester abortions, except for cases in which the woman’s life was at risk unless the abortion was performed.
A Woman’s Rights Over Her Own Body
In the years following this landmark decision, the pro-choice and pro-life factions within the country have been bitterly split. Just as loyalties have been sundered by Roe v. Wade, so too has a similar shockwave been experienced with the development of the abortion pill (RU486).
Despite the beliefs of many groups across the country, the fact remains that a woman’s right over her own body is an essential underpinning of the right to individual freedom. Without access to a discreet and safe way to abort an early-term pregnancy, how can it be argued that a woman in today’s society has the freedom to choose?
If, for example, a woman was raped and fell pregnant, should she not have easy access to the abortion pill so that she can exercise control over her own future? In a situation like this where the pregnancy is not only unwanted but forced upon the victim, what right do external groups have to demand a full-term pregnancy?
The Right to Choose
Places such as the well-regarded Metropolitan Family Planning Clinic offer women a choice over their own bodies and provide essential services. The abortion pill in Silver Spring, MD, is a relatively new medical development for unwanted pregnancies up to 9 weeks, but it represents an effective, discreet, and safe way for women to exercise their right to choose.
