Names: Section:22A8
Nardo, Mark Vincent H. Date: April,28,2025
Dorado, Rex
Title: The Complex Debate on Abortion: A Right to Choose or the Protection of Life?
Introduction
Abortion remains one of the most polarizing issues in modern society. It touches on
complex questions about life, personal autonomy, morality, and law. Supporters of
abortion rights argue that individuals should have control over their own bodies and
the ability to make choices that directly impact their lives. Opponents believe that life
begins at conception and that terminating a pregnancy is equivalent to murder. The
abortion debate forces societies to confront deep ethical dilemmas and legal
questions about rights, personhood, and the role of government. In this essay, I
argue that abortion should remain legal and accessible because it is fundamentally a
matter of personal autonomy, public health, and social justice, although I also
recognize that it deserves thoughtful regulation to protect potential life and maintain
ethical standards.
The Principle of Bodily Autonomy
One of the strongest arguments for legal abortion is the principle of bodily autonomy.
Bodily autonomy is the idea that individuals have the right to govern what happens to
their own bodies without external interference. Forcing someone to carry a
pregnancy to term against their will constitutes a profound violation of this principle.
In no other context are people legally required to use their bodies for the benefit of
another person. Even in cases where people could save lives—such as by donating
a kidney—they are not legally compelled to do so. Pregnancy, which dramatically
alters a person’s body, health, and future, should not be an exception.
The philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson famously illustrated this idea with her
“violinist analogy,” where she asked readers to imagine waking up connected to a
famous unconscious violinist whose life depends on being physically attached to
another person’s body. Thomson argued that even if the violinist had a right to life, it
would not automatically entail the right to use another person’s body without
consent. Similarly, even if one grants that a fetus has a right to life, it does not
automatically mean it can override the pregnant person’s right to bodily autonomy.
Public Health Implications
Another major argument in favor of legal abortion concerns public health. Historical
and contemporary evidence shows that when abortion is made illegal or heavily
restricted, the number of unsafe abortions increases, leading to severe health
consequences and deaths. According to the World Health Organization (WHO),
unsafe abortions account for approximately 13% of maternal deaths globally. In
countries where abortion is banned or severely restricted, women often turn to
unsafe methods, such as ingesting harmful substances or using unregulated surgical
procedures.
Legal access to abortion reduces the number of deaths and injuries associated with
unsafe practices. Moreover, countries with legal abortion often have better outcomes
in terms of maternal health overall. Legalization also enables proper medical
supervision, counseling, and the availability of safer, earlier procedures. Rather than
decreasing the number of abortions, strict bans often only make them more
dangerous. Protecting public health requires ensuring safe, legal, and accessible
abortion services.
Social Justice and Inequality
The ability to access abortion is deeply intertwined with issues of social justice.
Restrictions on abortion disproportionately affect marginalized groups—particularly
low-income individuals, young people, and racial minorities. Those with resources
can often travel to jurisdictions where abortion is legal or pay for private services,
while those without are forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term or resort to
unsafe methods.
Unplanned pregnancies can have profound effects on people’s lives, including
limiting educational and career opportunities, perpetuating cycles of poverty, and
increasing economic hardship. Access to abortion services empowers individuals,
especially women, to make decisions about their futures and participate fully in
society.
Furthermore, systemic inequalities in healthcare access exacerbate the challenges
of restricted abortion. In countries or regions where healthcare is already difficult to
obtain, making abortion illegal adds another barrier that affects the most vulnerable
populations the most.
Counterarguments and Moral Considerations
Despite the strong arguments in favor of legal abortion, it is important to
acknowledge the deeply held beliefs of those who oppose it. Many opponents argue
that life begins at conception and that the fetus has a right to life that must be
protected. From this perspective, abortion is morally wrong because it ends an
innocent human life.
This position raises important ethical questions: when does life begin, and at what
point does a fetus acquire rights? Different philosophical, religious, and scientific
perspectives offer different answers. Some argue that personhood begins at
conception; others point to viability (the point at which a fetus can survive outside the
womb) or birth.
While it is important to respect sincere moral concerns about protecting potential life,
it is equally important to recognize that granting full rights to a fetus from the moment
of conception can severely diminish the rights of the pregnant person. The pregnant
individual’s rights to health, autonomy, and self-determination must also be
considered. In a society that values individual freedom, personal conscience must be
respected, especially on issues as complex and deeply personal as abortion.
The Role of the State
Another important aspect of the abortion debate concerns the role of the state.
Should governments have the power to force people to remain pregnant against their
will? Advocates of limited government typically argue for minimal state interference
in personal decisions, especially concerning bodily autonomy and privacy.
The landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade (1973), which legalized
abortion nationwide (and was later overturned in 2022 by Dobbs v. Jackson
Women’s Health Organization), was based partly on the idea of a constitutional right
to privacy. While different countries have different legal frameworks, the general
principle that individuals should have control over intimate personal decisions is
widely accepted in democratic societies.
If the state can compel a person to use their body to sustain another life, it sets a
dangerous precedent that could be extended to other areas. Upholding the right to
abortion protects broader principles of personal liberty and bodily integrity.
Religious Perspectives and Secular Laws
Religion often plays a significant role in shaping people’s views on abortion. Many
religious traditions teach that life is sacred and that abortion is morally wrong.
However, in pluralistic societies, it is important to distinguish between personal
religious beliefs and secular law.
Not everyone shares the same religious views, and public policies should not impose
particular religious doctrines on the entire population. Freedom of religion also
includes freedom from religion. Individuals should have the ability to make decisions
based on their own beliefs, values, and circumstances, not according to a single
religious interpretation.
Furthermore, even within religious communities, there is often significant debate
about abortion. Some religious groups, including many progressive Christian,
Jewish, and Unitarian Universalist congregations, support reproductive rights.
Therefore, religious arguments should not be the sole basis for laws governing
abortion.
Abortion and Mental Health
Access to abortion also has significant mental health implications. Being forced to
carry an unwanted pregnancy can have serious psychological effects, including
depression, anxiety, and even suicidal ideation. Studies show that individuals who
are denied abortions are more likely to experience mental health problems compared
to those who are able to obtain the procedure.
The Turnaway Study, a major longitudinal study conducted in the United States,
found that women who were denied abortions faced greater financial hardship, were
more likely to stay in abusive relationships, and experienced worse health outcomes
compared to those who received abortions. Conversely, most individuals who have
abortions do not regret their decision and experience relief rather than long-term
psychological harm.
Protecting mental health is a compelling reason to ensure access to safe and legal
abortion services.
The Need for Regulation
While advocating for legal abortion, it is important to acknowledge that abortion
should be regulated appropriately. Abortion should be safe, rare, and legal.
Reasonable regulations, such as gestational limits after the point of fetal viability
(with exceptions for risks to the pregnant person’s health), informed consent
requirements, and measures to ensure that procedures are conducted safely and
ethically, are important to balance the rights of pregnant individuals with respect for
potential life.
Regulations should not be designed to create unnecessary barriers, such as
mandatory waiting periods or targeted restrictions intended to close clinics, but rather
to ensure that abortion services are provided responsibly and safely.
Conclusion
Abortion is a deeply complex and emotionally charged issue that touches on
fundamental questions about life, autonomy, morality, and the role of the state. While
acknowledging the sincere concerns of those who oppose abortion, the weight of the
arguments supports the conclusion that abortion should remain legal, safe, and
accessible.
Respect for bodily autonomy, the need to protect public health, the demands of
social justice, and the principles of limited government and secular law all point
toward the necessity of allowing individuals to make their own decisions regarding
abortion. At the same time, thoughtful and compassionate regulation can help
balance competing interests and maintain ethical standards.
Ultimately, ensuring access to abortion is about respecting the ability of individuals to
control their own bodies, make their own moral choices, and live their own lives
according to their own values. In a free and just society, that right must be
preserved.
