abortion rights essay questions

245 Abortion Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

📑 aspects to cover in an abortion essay, 🏆 best abortion topic ideas & essay examples, 🥇 most interesting abortion topics to write about, 💡 good essay topics on abortion, 📌 simple & easy abortion essay titles, 📑 good research topics about abortion, 🎓 abortion argumentative essay topics, ❓ questions about abortion for research paper.

If you need to write an abortion essay, you might be worried about the content, arguments, and other components of the paper. Don’t panic – this guide contains the key aspects that will make your essay on abortion outstanding.

Historical Perspectives

First of all, you should think about the historical perspectives on abortion. It is true that unwanted pregnancies were a thing long before any legislation in this area has been enacted. If you want to write on this topic, consider the following:

• Historically, what were the main reasons for women of various titles to abort children?
• What were the methods used for abortion before the development of modern medicine?
• Were there any famous historical examples of women who aborted?
• Is the history of abortion relevant to the contemporary debate? Why or why not?

Religious Arguments

In an abortion essay, pro-life arguments usually stem from religious beliefs. Hence, there are plenty of possibilities for you to explore religious arguments related to the debate on abortion. Here are some things to think about:

• What are the ideas about abortion in different religions?
• Why do various religions have different views on abortion?
• Were there any other factors that affected how different religions saw abortion (e.g., political or social)?
• Would an complete abortion ban be a correct solution from a religious viewpoint? Why or why not?

Moral Arguments

Abortion is probably one of the most popular topics in the study of ethics. Moral arguments exist for both pro-choice and pro-life views on abortion, and you can thus explore both sides of the debate in your paper. These questions will help you to get started:

• Why is abortion considered an ethical dilemma?
• What do different ethical theories show when applied to abortion?
• From a moral viewpoint, should the life of an unborn child be more important than the physical, psychological, and socioeconomic well being of the mother? Why or why not?
• What would be some negative consequences of an abortion ban?

Women’s Rights

Abortion essay topics are often linked to the issue of women’s rights. According to most feminists, abortion is related to women’s bodily autonomy, and thus, legislators should not try to limit access to safe abortions. If you wish to explore the relationship between women’s rights and abortion, focus on the following:

• Why is abortion considered to be a feminist issue?
• Who should be involved in decisions about abortion?
• Considering that most legislators who pass pro-life laws are male, is it correct to understand abortion legislation as reproductive control?
• What are other gender issues associated with abortion?
• From the feminist viewpoint, what would be the best way to approach the problem of high abortion rates?

Essay Structure

The structure of your essay is just as important as its content, so don’t forget about it. Here is what you could do to make your paper stand out:

• Read sample papers on abortion to see how other people structure their work.
• Write a detailed abortion essay outline before you start working.
• Make sure that your points follow in a logical sequence – this will make your paper more compelling!
• For a good abortion essay conclusion, do not introduce any new sources or points in the final paragraph.

By covering the aspects above, you will be able to write an influential paper that will earn you an excellent mark. Before you begin researching, check our website for free abortion essay examples and other useful content to help you get an A*!

• Pros and Cons of Abortion to the Society Argumentative Essay In the case of rape or incest, keeping a pregnancy is very traumatizing to the person raped as no one would wish to keep a child that is a result of this, and the best […]
• Abortions: Causes, Effects, and Solutions The principal causes for the abortion problem are the social cause, which mandates ethical attitudes; the political cause, which affects legislation; and the environmental cause, which illuminates the initial stages of human development.
• Abortion: To Legalize or Not If a mother is denied an abortion due to its illegality, that mother then will be forced to go through the pregnancy, the labor, the birth, and the raising of an unwanted child. Another concern […]
• Abortion and Virtue Ethics Those who support the right of a woman to an abortion even after the final trimester makes the assertion that the Constitution does not provide any legal rights for a child that is still within […]
• Should Abortion Be Legal In addition to the burden of carrying the unborn baby, in most cases research findings have indicated that, majority of individuals who father some babies are unwilling to take the responsibility of contributing to the […]
• Ethics and Abortion In weighing the options concerning whether to perform an abortion and how to care for the patient, a healthcare entity must consider the legal implications, the patient’s and provider’s beliefs as well as the health […]
• The Mother and the Challenges of Abortion In conclusion, it is clear that despite having procured abortions in the past, she wanted to be a mother to her children.
• Christian Ethics Issues and Abortion As for the rights and interests of the mother, when comparing them with the rights and interests of the child, there is a possibility of an axiological preference for the goods of the latter.
• Abortion in Teenagers: Proposal Argument In the overwhelming majority of cases, the teenager who has encountered such problems is inclined to violate the law, which often leads her to illegal and sometimes unsafe abortion. According to WHO, it is the […]
• Abortion: Why It Should Be Banned Most people are suffering from various pregnancy-related traumas as more and more couples are experiencing conceiving difficulties due to the current unhealthy food intake and environmental conditions; thus, having a baby could change a lot […]
• Abortion and the Aspects of Pro-Abortion There are occasions where somebody can have an untimely pregnancy that might end up enslaving her to the man and this can be sorted out through abortion A foetus is not a baby and there […]
• Teen Abortion: Understanding the Risks Some liberalists have been at the forefront in advocating for women to be accorded exclusive rights to abort by basing their facts on the premise that abortion is a largely private matter, but their arguments […]
• Discussion of Abortions: Advantages and Disadvantages The topic of abortions is, arguably, one of the most controversial and emotionally charged in the medical history, and it continues to cause a divide in healthcare even today.
• Abortion: An Ethical Dilemma and Legal Position The core concerns in the controversy are whether women should have the right to decide to terminate a pregnancy or whether the unborn child has the right to life.
• Abortion Law in Canada For instance, in the report released by the Canada government in 2005, the overall rate of abortion in the country was approximately 14%, which was less than the 20% incidents reported in the United States, […]
• Arguments Against the Abortion The other danger associated with abortion is that it poses a danger to the reproductive system of women in the future.
• Moral Issues in the Abortion The moral authority termination of life lies in the hands of the mother despite the influence of the society about the issue.
• Debating the Issue of Abortion The psychological price to pay for abortion is irredeemable and not unless anyone wants to live a downtrodden life, she should refrain from abortion.
• Conservative and Liberal Arguments on Abortion Governments and health organizations’ move to control access to abortion led to the emergence of groups and movements supporting and opposing abortion.
• Abortion: Ethical Dilemma in Pope John Paul II’s View This paper tries to examine the abortion ethical dilemma from the lens of the Pope’s thoughts and proposals. Towards the end of the 20th century, new ideas and thoughts began to emerge in different parts […]
• Abortion and the Theory of Act Utilitarianism One possible philosophical approach to the problem of choice in such sensitive issues as abortion is the theory of Utilitarianism measuring the moral value of the action.
• Social Problem: Abortion The willingness of the students to partake in the procurement of abortion was significantly correlated with the views that they held regarding the issue of abortion, the extent to which they would be required to […]
• Abortion Counseling and Psychological Support One recurrence is a woman’s lack of autonomy which can directly pressure the decision to have an abortion. Women may be driven by a number of influences and ideological factors to have a certain level […]
• Barriers to Access to Abortion Services Therefore, the prohibition of abortions can be potentially harmful to the health of women, and they understand it. Nevertheless, the society is not ready to accept abortion as a common event in the life of […]
• Anti-Abortion Legislation and Services in Texas It might be possible to state that the aim of the legislation adopted so as to limit the provision of abortion service for the population was to reduce the number of abortions carried out in […]
• Abortion-Related Ethical Considerations As a health practitioner, following the required professional standards and regulations on abortion will enable me to avoid the wrath of the law.
• Texas Abortion Ban as Current Political Topic Furthermore, denying women the right to make decisions regarding their bodies leads to the denial of bodily autonomy, which, in turn, must be regarded as a severe infringement on basic human rights.
• Abortion in Australia: Legal and Ethical Issues A woman’s sexual companion is not needed to be informed of an abortion, and the judicial system does not give orders to stop the termination even when the complainant is the biological father of the […]
• Abortion Law Reform and Maternal Mortality: Global Study Some of the criteria for selecting a credible source include the authors’ reputation, the time elapsed since published, and the legality of the publishing company or database.”Abortion Laws Reform May Reduce Maternal Mortality: An Ecological […]
• The Ethics of Abortion in Nursing The sanctity of human life, non-maleficence, and the right to autonomy and self-determination are some of the fundamental ethical ideas frequently addressed regarding abortion.
• Utilitarian Permissive Concept for Women’s Right to Choose Abortion Utilitarians believe that the right to choose abortion should be protected under the law as a matter of justice since a woman should have the right to make decisions concerning her own body and health.
• Abortion: Positive and Negative Sides To sum up, despite abortion being presented as an illegal intervention against human life, proponents believe that as a safe medical procedure, it protects the lives of mothers.
• Abortion vs. Right to Life Among Evangelical Protestants The issue of abortion is critical to many citizens, especially women. In addition to restricting women’s rights, the issue of abortion affects well-being.
• Abortion and Significant Health Complications Considering the effects of abortion, such as excessive bleeding, infection, and perforation of the uterus, surgical abortion procedures due to incomplete abortion or even death abortion can be fatal to life and one’s health.
• Abortion as an Ethical Issue in Medicine In resolving the conflict between the decision to obtain an abortion from a minor adolescent and the nurse, there may be the following solution.
• Teen Abortion: Legal and Ethical Implications The second legal implication is that the patient has the right to medical privacy and confidentiality, and the doctor may not be able to legally tell the patient’s mother about the pregnancy or abortion without […]
• Abortion as a Medical Necessity Moreover, in case of fetal death, abnormalities, ectopic pregnancy, or harm to the woman’s health, it is obligatory to follow the recommendations of doctors who objectively assess the situation. Hence, individual factors influence the development […]
• Abortion Ban: Ethical Controversies and History of Laws Abortion bans are the attempt to restrict the rights of women to procure an abortion when needed. On the other hand, arguments against the abortion ban focus on the bodily autonomy of women and the […]
• Impact of Abortion Bans on Black Women Black women and other females of color will be disproportionately affected by the United States Supreme Court’s ruling to invalidate the right to an abortion as guaranteed by the Constitution.
• The Problem of Late-Term Abortion Late-term abortion is associated with high-risk complications for the mother and inhumane treatment of the unborn child. There is an immense violation of the child’s rights if abortion is to be done after 20 weeks […]
• Abortion With Limitations: Discussion Such insights support the notion that such a medical practice could be pursued in a professional manner when the life of the mother appears to be at risk.
• Elizabeth Leiter’s The Abortion Divide Review Undeniably, The Abortion Divide film adequately shows the gradual growth in differences between the pro-choice and pro-life supporters but fails to bring a solution to the moral problem of abortion.
• Abortion and Mental Health as Controversial Issues There have been issues related to the use of face masks and the number of cases of infected people. The topic of autism is a huge controversy due to denial or a lack of awareness.
• Philosophical Reasoning About Deliberately Induced Abortion The philosophical discussion about the relationship between the right to life and bodily autonomy has become especially aggravated in the modern world.
• The Abortion Theme in Society and Literature The author does not directly mention whether the couple or the parent had opted for abortion but relating to how society handles unwanted pregnancy, the thought must have crossed people’s minds, and that is how […]
• Abortion: Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Positions Traditionally, those concerned with the abortion dilemma take one of two positions – pro-life, in which it is required to keep the fetus alive, and pro-choice, following which a woman has the right to end […]
• Nursing Ethics Regarding Abortion Currently, several articles exist that highlight different facets of this issue in nursing, including the ability of nurses to object to abortion, their confrontation with the law, and their perception of specific types of abortion.
• The Government Stance on Abortion as an Ethical Issue Throughout the years, the practice has been both legalized and prohibited in the US, with the government’s shift in attitudes being central to the ambiguity of the issue.
• Is Abortion Moral From Kantian Standpoint? The difficulties in using Kantian deontology to discuss the morality of abortion are defining whether the fetus is a human, and the role ethics play in actual decision-making.
• Abortion of a Fetus With Disability It is worth paying attention to the fact that it is precise because of such things that terminations of pregnancy occur so that a person does not come into contact with obvious prejudices still actively […]
• Pro-Abortion Arguments and Justification In general, terminating a pregnancy is the key to a woman’s prosperity, social and moral well-being, and ability to control the future.
• Law of Interest: Abortion Restrictions In the current paper, I will discuss the Texas Senate Bill 8, which is the legislation related to abortion restrictions. Therefore, the bill is interesting from the standpoint of ethical considerations, which are double-natured.
• Researching of Abortion Rights The authors of the three articles support my viewpoint by depicting the health-related and ethical risks that may take place if abortion laws continue to be restrictive.
• Aspects Against Abortion Rights Having reviewed both the supporters and opponents of abortion in the legal and ethical contexts, the writers express their pro-life views, saying that life should be respected while offering their ideas on the aforementioned contexts.
• Religious Beliefs and Medical Ethics: The Dilemma of Abortion in Cuban Society The process of giving birth to a child is considered a holiday for Cubans, and the family supports the woman after giving birth in every possible way.
• Legislative Powers in Texas: Case of Abortions In this particular situation, the Speaker of the House supports my position in the role of trustee, but here the position of the lieutenant governor is much more critical since the bill is heard in […]
• Abortion Backlash and Leadership Issues Although the issue of abortion in the United States remains one of the weightiest issues, with a high possibility of affecting the well-being of the people, it has been entirely politicized.
• Anti-Abortion Laws: The Roe v. Wade Case Therefore, the Roe case is similar to the Griswold case, making the use of the latter as a precedent justifiable. The precedent case in Roe v.
• Majority Opinion on Abortion Legalization vs. Prohibition Abortion is not the result of a nation’s historical or even cultural experience but merely the result of the adoption of restrictions.
• The “Why Abortion Is Immoral” Article by Don Marquis Don Marquis gives a different argument regarding the immorality of abortion from the standard anti-abortion argument in his “Why Abortion Is Immoral” article.
• Judith Jarvis Thomson on Women’s Right to Abortion The most serious objection to Thompson’s argument might be the one addressing abortion as a killing of a child, given that the fetus is considered a human being from the moment of conception.
• The Right to Abortion: Childless Women The issue of inferential statistics in this example is motivated by considering the possibility of extrapolating results from the sample to the general population in the context of the population mean, i.e, no children for […]
• Abortion and Women’s Right to Control Their Bodies However, the decision to ban abortions can be viewed as illegal, unethical, and contradicting the values of the 21st century. In such a way, the prohibition of abortion is a serious health concern leading to […]
• Role of Abortion Policies Discussion The introduction of regulation and informed consent measures in the case of abortion policies is feasible from the perspective of eliminating health risks for the population.
• Abortion-Related Racial Discrimination in the US In spite of being a numerical minority, Black women in the U.S.resort to abortion services rather often compared to the White population.
• Should Abortions Be Illegal as Form of Homicide? When it comes to the difference between my opinion and the status quo, I believe that abortions cannot be considered a form of homicide and cannot be persecuted.
• Abortions: Abortions Stigmatization Another issue regards the unavailability of abortions and the consequences of women being denied in abortions, and the necessity of choice for women to terminate or not terminate a pregnancy.
• Socio-Psychological Factors of Abortion in Women of Different Age Groups It is necessary to conduct a theoretical analysis of the pregnancy termination problem, reflected in psychological research. In addition, it is essential to improve the state of social stability.
• Women in Marriage & Sex, Abortion, and Birth Control The historical period chosen is from the eighteenth to the twentieth century to demonstrate the advancement of social structures for women.
• Constitutional Issues of Abortion Rights Constitution, regulating the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, laid the legal basis for the practical implementation of the American concept of civil rights. The amendments that were passed later on the base of the […]
• Abortion Trends in the United States The history of the legalization of abortion in the United States has a history of several decades and is still the problem of reproductive rights today is quite acute.
• Texas Abortion Laws for Victims of Sexual Assault A female will have approximately two weeks in the law to evaluate her situation, verify the conception with a test, determine how to handle the pregnancy, and undergo an abortion.
• Discussion of Abortion Accesion for Women Other individuals perceive abortion as a rather reasonable and necessary procedure that should exist as a part of healthcare and be accessible to the women who refuse to give birth to a child due to […]
• A Controversial Process of Abortion Abortion is morally wrong and should not occur at any stage of human life because it only deprives the fetus of a right to life.
• Abortion Politics and Moral Concerns Supporters of the third position think that abortion is a form of killing a person since the embryo is a person with the right to life from the moment of conception.
• “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion” Article by Warren In the first section of the paper, Mary Ann Warren suggests that it is impossible to establish whether abortion is morally permissible, provided one accepts that the fetus is a being with a full right […]
• Abortion on the Grounds of Disability Removing a fetus from the woman’s womb results in death which is contrary to the morals of the community that is against killing.
• Abortion: The Role of Nursing Staff In addition, the task of the nurse may be to inform the patient about the abortion process and its possible consequences. Medical personnel must respect the decision and rights of a woman who decides to […]
• Abortion and Its Physical and Psychological Effects Physiological and physical disorders that may develop in the long run due to abortion have a wide range of unfavorable consequences.
• Discussion of Abortion Rights Aspects 1, 2017, pp. It would be best used to illustrate the argument in favor of abortion rights based on the [regnant women’s right to health, which is its major strength.
• Do We Need to Legalize Abortions? Therefore, every person should take a moment to research this uncomfortable subject and think about the consequences of unsafe and illegal abortion for women, children, and society.
• Ethical Dilemma of Abortion Triumphalism In this issue and other matters, the affected person’s experience may not be a determining factor for the expression of opinion but is unique.
• The Texas Abortion Law: A Signal of War on Women’s Rights and Bodies The purpose of this paper is to examine the structure and implications of the Texas Abortion Law in order to demonstrate its flaws.
• Abortion and Menstrual Health and Society’s Views Limited resources, menstrual materials, and access to facilities are often a result of the lack of policy dedicated to the sexual health of individuals.
• The Problem of Abortion in Today’s World Therefore, the choice of the topic of late abortion is justified because of the importance and need to cover this issue.
• Abortion in the Context of Ethics and Laws The aim of this paper is to analyze abortion in the context of the law, ethics, and human rights and to identify the solution to the issue.
• Societal Approach to Abortion at Various Levels Due to its relevance in society, the issue of abortion has those affirmative, the proposers, and those who think that abortion is a vice against humanity and unethical, the opposers.
• The Problem of Abortion: Key Aspects Abortion should not be permitted because any procedure that results in the termination of pregnancy before viability is contrary to the religious idea.
• The Issue of Prohibitions on Abortions in Texas I want to talk about the indifference to women’s problems on the part of those who have vowed to be the guardians of justice in our country.
• Abortion as a Modern-Day Dilemma for the US Community For this reason, the right for abortion must be seen as the integral part of a system of human rights, specifically, those that must be given solely to women based on the reality of their […]
• Abortion: Ethical and Religious Aspects From the Christian perspective, the miracle of human life is the most valuable gift, as the creation of human beings in imago Dei allows them to experience the blessings of life and exercising the service […]
• The Ethical Dilemma on Abortion From the perspective of the Christian philosophy, a person is a product and manifestation of the love of God, hence the sanctity of any human life.
• An Abortion Versus Fetus’s Right Dilemma On the other hand, she is afraid that the child will serve as a reminder of the rapist and she has set a lot of plans for her studies and career path.
• “What I Saw at the Abortion” by Richard Selzer This sight made Selzer imagine that the fetus was struggling with the needle in this way, that he was scared and hurt, that he was trying to save itself.
• Abortion: Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Argumentation To convince the States to provide access to abortion services for women legally, the article’s author refers to standards of human rights to health and other fundamental human rights. The article’s author refers to international […]
• The Effects of Age and Other Personal Characteristics on Abortion Attitudes This is tantamount to seeking a face-saving compromise where the core issues are in black and white and is similar to the uncompromising stands of those for and against homosexual marriage; of pederasts, pedophiles and […]
• Supporting the Women Undergoing Abortion One in every five pregnancies in the world results in abortions. The main aim of the paper is to study the perceptions of nurses attending to abortion patients.
• The Politics of Abortion in Modern Day Jamaica In the first part of the dissertation, the influence of the Offences Against the Person Act of 1861 was discussed on abortion practices and laws around the world, including Jamaica.
• Abortion as Moral and Ethical Dilemma Despite the conflicting approaches to solving the moral and ethical dilemma of abortion, experts agree that it is possible to reduce the severity of the problem with the help of more excellent sexual education of […]
• Regarding Abortion vs. Adoption In such cases, the couple, or more specifically, the woman is forced to face the reality of her situation and make a decision that will definitely affect the rest of her life.
• Class Action Against the Enforcement of Texas Abortion The specific grounds of inconsistency are that the laws seek to prohibit an attempt to obtain or the actual procurement of an abortion regardless of the circumstances with the exception of the special circumstance of […]
• Ethics in Health Care-Pro-Abortion There has been myriad of reported cases of failure to uphold the integrity of the unborn and the possible health related problems that would affect a mother’s health especially in the event of unsuccessful abortion.
• The Benefits of Declining an Abortion Procedure The women may feel that they do not deserve the love of their children, and a sincere act such s a child refusing to suckle is perceived as the child directing hatred to the mother […]
• Hills Like White Elephants. Abortion or Breakup It is used to demonstrate the stalemate in the couples’ relationships the necessity to choose between an abortion and a breakup.
• Parental Consent in Minors’ Abortions Thus, the parents or guardians of the teenage girl ought to be aware of the planned abortion and explain the possible consequences of abortion to the girl.
• Ethics and Reproduction Health: Surrogacy, Multiple Pregnancies, Abortion When the child is born, the contracting woman becomes the mother of the child, but she is not a biological mother because the child has the genes of the husband and the surrogate mother.
• Applying the Moral Model to Evaluate Abortion Issue The MORAL model could be used to evaluate the issue by following the five components of the model. Upon reviewing the aspects, a nurse may want to know the current health status of the patient.
• Induced and Spontaneous Abortion and Breast Cancer Incidence Among Young Women There is also no question as to whether those who had breast cancer was only as a result of abortion the cohort study does not define the total number of women in population.
• Abortion-Related-Maternal Death in Dominican Republic There is need to focus the effort in pressuring the lawmakers to respect the rights of women. The Dominican law prohibits women from abortion even the life of woman and the child is in danger.
• How Do Abortion Laws and Regulations Affect Anti-Abortion Violence? Moreover, support for anti-abortion violence can also be considered as a political weapon against women’s rights that is linked to the tolerance of violence against women.
• Benefits of Abortion Overview Therefore, although some believe that abortion is equal to murder, many are still for abortion because it allows women to have control over their bodies, achieve full potential, and avoid engaging in hazardous abortion methods.
• Abortion Techniques and Ban in Nicaragua The case of Nicaragua has shown to be particularly challenging as the country’s leaders are adhering to the patriarchal worldview that does not consider the rights and the health of women, and the importance of […]
• How Christians View Abortion There are people who claim that the act of abortion is okay since it does not amount to the death of a live being.
• Teen Pregnancy: Abortion Rates Rise In the spotlight was the matter of teen pregnancy since teen births and abortion are both consequences of the former. That teen pregnancy rates fell in the 1990s and rose in the middle of this […]
• Abortion and Its Side Effects in the United States One of the most dominant restrictions in the 1992 ruling is that parents are supposed to be involved in the decision making platform before an abortion can be carried out.
• Cider House Rules Movie and Abortion However, upon raping her own daughter and making her pregnant, a reason was introduced for Homer to follow the path of his mentor as he becomes an abortionist for the first time.
• Maryland State Bill on Abortion According to the bill, women are supposed to see the ultrasound image in the uterus before an abortion is performed on them.
• Legalizing Abortion in the USA: Pros and Cons Since abortion was legalized in the US in the year 1973, the rates of abortion have gone up to approximately 1.
• Pro-Choice: The Issue of Abortion Abortion has become a highly debatable issue in the United States because of the ethics and morality involved in the act and the possibility of resorting to it in an elective manner.
• The Ethics of Abortion: Discussion The essay first examines the philosophical and religious concept of life and how the decision to abort affects the right to life of the fetus as also the existential dilemma that may arise when a […]
• Is Abortion Right or Wrong: A Dilemma The supporters of abortion feel that a woman should be given the chance to decide on abortion as being pregnant and having a baby involves dealing with many consequences.
• Medical Ethics. Should Abortion Be Banned? However, in the present situation of the world in general and the United States in particular, there is no doubt that abortion is a bad practice that deserves to be banned in all cases except […]
• Legalities of Carrying Out Abortion Discussion This led to the emergence of such groupings as pro-life, who advocate for the consideration of abortion as murder, and pro-choice who are of the view that women should have the right of choice of […]
• Issue of Abortion Abortion in Islam and Christianity This law justifies the humanity of the unborn baby and places the child in the same level of an adult being who has caused the miscarriage.
• Abortion Is Legal but Is It Ethical? It is not difficult to understand how God’s words can be considered open to analysis but the difficulty of the abortion issue is that the breadth of the interpretation is very wide.
• Ethical Problem of Abortion However, the major point of contention has not been whether the mother is the victim or not; but more on where does the fetus really attain the status of a person with rights and the […]
• Abortions and Birth Control As a result the overall mortality of women increases in the countries where legal abortions take place. The general point of view in decreasing the number of abortions is the use of contraceptives as a […]
• Abortion as an Unmerciful and Irresponsible Act Abortion is a very big risk to the health of the woman who opts to undergo an abortion. The biggest risk is to the life of the woman who opts for an abortion.
• Abortion in Islamic View If a woman finds that she is pregnant, and does not want to be, what is the best way out for her, the potential baby that she is carrying, and all the other people concerned […]
• Noonan and Thomson’s View on Abortion A more disarming approach is that of Thomson who maintains that the mother’s right to control her own body overrides the right to life of the fetus unless the mother has a special responsibility to […]
• Factors Contributing to the Decline in Abortion A considerable decline in abortion has been witnessed and I propose to assess the factors that have contributed to the decline in abortion. The next is the reason for the decline in the number of […]
• Bioethics. When Abortion Is Morally Permissible Abortion as we all know is the deliberate removal of a foetus from the womb of a female resulting in the death of the foetus.
• Abortion Debate: Overview of Both Positions Daniel Oliver appears to be the supporter of the pro-life side of the debate, even though he does not impose his opinion on the reader and does not write that abortion is wrong.
• Abortion: Strengths and Limitations They believe that it is the right of a woman to have an abortion when they want to, and they should also not be forced to have an abortion if they want to give birth.
• Importance of Legalizing of Abortions Three of the most common reasons why women choose abortion is that they do not have the financial resources to raise a child, the others feel that they are not ready to have a child, […]
• Ethical Issues of Counseling: Abortion and Divorce Personal values and beliefs, world views, and attitudes of both a counselor and a client have a great impact on the therapeutic relationship and effective treatment.
• Contemporary Argument on Abortion Review Abortion is treated differently as some find it a moral crime, others think that it is a reasonable way out from the unwanted pregnancy situation, and there is also a viewpoint that abortion is the […]
• Abortion: Premeditated Murder or a Reasonable Way Out? Speaking of the second point the supporters of abortion have, we should say that they find abortion as the mother’s attempt to protect the unborn child from the various hardship she will fail to fight.
• Women’s Health Issues: Abortion Reasons and Laws As one can see, the physical, psychological, and social risks of limiting access to abortion or proposing hostile policies are apparent.
• View of Abortion: The Question of Human Life and Death In order to describe the question of abortion it is important to define and explain it.”Abortion’ as a ‘spontaneous or induced termination of pregnancy”, and “miscarriage’ as the ‘the spontaneous loss of an early pregnancy […]
• Abortion: An Unsolvable Dilemma? We know that Christians are composed of three congregations: the Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Those who believe in the Bible, it is clear that the Bible is straightforward on life, that is that God is […]
• Unsafe Abortions Concepts Analysis The overall attitudes to abortion were negative, and women who succeeded in aborting pregnancy faced opposition from their partners, social ostracism, and quasi-legal sanctions.
• New Jersey Bill A495 on Abortion This paper aims to review the New Jersey Bill A495, the differences in the legislation process between New Jersey and other states, provide a personal position on the issue of abortion, and discuss the impact […]
• Social Work Framework for the Abortion Seeking Experience In countries that do allow abortion, the law has to be adhered to and I would have to do the abortion or give the needed advice despite my ethical or religious beliefs.
• The Safety and Quality of Abortion Care in the United States What is the association between the appropriateness of specific abortion services and various clinical circumstances? What are the physical and mental health effects of abortion?
• The Abortion Debate: The Moral Status of the Fetus All arguments about abortion do not come down to the question of what is the moral status of the fetus since there are other aspects involved, including the health conditions of the mother, the fetus’s […]
• Abortion in Ireland: Law and Public Opinion Abortion in Ireland is a highly controversial issue despite the May 26, 2018 landslide victory, which saw the repealing of the Eighth Amendment of the constitution to allow women to abort albeit under certain circumstances.
• Anti-Abortion Social Movements and Legislators’ Role In the described cases, the main task for the representatives is to make law as flexible as possible, and this is one of the most complicated things to do.
• The Politics of Abortion
• Abortion Is Too Complex to Feel All One Way About
• The Last Abortion Clinic
• Why Abortion Is Immoral?
• Abortion, Its Causes and Psychological Problems
• Abortion Debates of Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Parties
• Abortion as a Constitutional Right of US Women
• Is Abortion Morally Justified?
• Abortion Debate: Immoral Aspect of Pregnancy Termination
• Teenage Pregnancy, Abortion, and Sex Education
• Elective Abortion For and Against
• Should Abortions Be Legal?
• Abortion Rights: Roe vs. Wade Case
• Abortion in Thomas Aquinas’ Religious View
• Abortion as a Crime and the Fight Against It
• Abortion From the Utilitarian Perspective
• Abortion in Marquis’s vs. Thompson’s Arguments
• Canadian vs. American Post-Abortion Care
• Abortion: Quality of Life and Genetic Abnormalities
• Teenage Pregnancy and Abortion: Articles Evaluation
• Abortion in the Middle East
• Abortion Practice in the Middle East
• The Minimum Hourly Wages and the Abortions
• Conflicting Viewpoints: Should Abortion Be Legal?
• “The Last Abortion Clinic”: Documentary Analysis
• Ethical Dilemma: Political Involvement in Abortion
• Legalization of Abortion for Underage Girls
• Legalizing Abortion: Advantages and Justification
• Abortion Incidence in the United State
• Ethics of Abortion: Controversial Issues
• “A Defence of Abortion” by Thomson
• Abortion’s Pros and Cons
• Social Issues: Abortions Prohibition
• Abortion Law Importance in Canada
• Abortion: Theories and Moral Issues
• Anti- and Pro-Abortion Arguments
• A Woman Has A Natural Right To Get An Abortion
• Controversial Question About Abortion
• Abortion: Pro-Choice and Pro-Life Movement
• The Issue of Abortion in the African Continent
• State of Abortion Laws
• Moral Problems of Abortion
• President Reagan’s Thoughts on Abortion
• Abortion and Parental Consent
• Analysis of Abortion as an Ethical Issue
• Ethics in Professional Psychology: Abortion Issue
• Abortion as a Health Ethics Issue
• Abortion as a Current Public Policy Issue
• A Call to Legalize Abortion
• Should Canada Have An Abortion Law?
• Abortion’s Merits and Demerits of in the Global Perspectives
• Freedom of Women to Choose Abortion
• Compare and Contrast Analysis Socio-Political and Moral Agenda of Abortion
• Abortions Legal in the U.S.A.
• Abortion: Analysis of Pro-Abortion Arguments
• The Role of US Government on Abortions
• Exploiting Nazism in Abortion Debate
• Abortion Principles – Case of George and Linda
• Is Self-Defense Abortion Permissible?
• Africa Is Not Ready to Embrace Abortion
• The Ethics of Abortion
• The Debate About Abortion
• Moral Controversies of Abortion
• The Issue of Abortion
• The Case Against Legalization of Abortion
• The Burning Debate on Abortion
• Conflicting Views on Abortion
• Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Sides of Abortion
• No More Abortion: Anti-Abortion Debate
• The Right to Abortion
• The Problem of Legality or Illegality of Terminating Pregnancy (Abortion)
• Abortion and Its Effects
• The True Extremist on Abortion: The Analysis of Tom Trinkon’s Essay
• The Problems of Abortion in Modern Society
• Social Problem of Abortion: Dealing With Media
• Abortion as a Controversial Issue
• How Christians Respond to the Issue of Abortion?
• Did Legalizing Abortion Reduce Crime Rate in the US?
• Does Abortion Have Severe Psychological Effects?
• Does Increased Abortion Lead To Lower Crime?
• Does Natural Law Allow Abortion?
• What Are Economic Incentives for Sex-Selective Abortion in India?
• How Christians Might Put Their Beliefs About Abortion Into Action?
• How Christian Teachings May Be Used in a Discussion About Abortion?
• How Abortion Laws Have Changed Around the World?
• How Are Religious and Ethical Principles Used in the Abortion?
• How Has Abortion and Birth Control Affected the 20th and 21st Century?
• How Roman Catholics Might Put Their Beliefs About Abortion Into Practice?
• How Useful Are Kantian Ethics for Drawing Conclusions About Abortion?
• How Women Are Psychologically Impacted by Abortion?
• What Are the Ethical Issues Raised With Abortion?
• Who Should Decide the Legality of Abortion?
• Why Abortion Should Remain Legal and With Limitations?
• Why Has Abortion Created Serious Debates and Controversies Among the Mainline?
• Why the Government Should Ban Abortion?
• Women Should Have the Right to Have Abortion?
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, March 2). 245 Abortion Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/abortion-essay-examples/

"245 Abortion Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 2 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/abortion-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '245 Abortion Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 2 March.

IvyPanda . 2024. "245 Abortion Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." March 2, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/abortion-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "245 Abortion Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." March 2, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/abortion-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "245 Abortion Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." March 2, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/abortion-essay-examples/.

• Human Rights Essay Ideas
• Moral Dilemma Paper Topics
• Childbirth Titles
• Motherhood Ideas
• Sex Education Essay Titles
• Humanism Research Ideas
• Birth control Questions
• Human Development Research Ideas
• Parenting Research Topics
• Parent Essay Ideas
• Family Titles
• Affordable Care Act Essay Titles
• Women’s Rights Titles
• Reproductive Health Essay Titles
• Health Promotion Research Topics

10 Essential Essays About Women’s Reproductive Rights

“Reproductive rights” let a person decide whether they want to have children, use contraception, or terminate a pregnancy. Reproductive rights also include access to sex education and reproductive health services. Throughout history, the reproductive rights of women in particular have been restricted. Girls and women today still face significant challenges. In places that have seen reproductive rights expand, protections are rolling back. Here are ten essential essays about reproductive rights:

“Our Bodies, Ourselves: Reproductive Rights”

bell hooks Published in Feminism Is For Everyone (2014)

This essay opens strong: when the modern feminism movement started, the most important issues were the ones linked to highly-educated and privileged white women. The sexual revolution led the way, with “free love” as shorthand for having as much sex as someone wanted with whoever they wanted. This naturally led to the issue of unwanted pregnancies. Birth control and abortions were needed.

Sexual freedom isn’t possible without access to safe, effective birth control and the right to safe, legal abortion. However, other reproductive rights like prenatal care and sex education were not as promoted due to class bias. Including these other rights more prominently might have, in hooks’ words, “galvanized the masses.” The right to abortion in particular drew the focus of mass media. Including other reproductive issues would mean a full reckoning about gender and women’s bodies. The media wasn’t (and arguably still isn’t) ready for that.

“Racism, Birth Control, and Reproductive Rights”

Angela Davis Published in Women, Race, & Class (1981)

Davis’ essay covers the birth control movement in detail, including its race-based history. Davis argues that birth control always included racism due to the belief that poor women (specifically poor Black and immigrant women) had a “moral obligation” to birth fewer children. Race was also part of the movement from the beginning because only wealthy white women could achieve the goals (like more economic and political freedom) driving access to birth control.

In light of this history, Davis emphasizes that the fight for reproductive freedom hasn’t led to equal victories. In fact, the movements driving the gains women achieved actively neglected racial inequality. One clear example is how reproductive rights groups ignored forced sterilization within communities of color. Davis ends her essay with a call to end sterilization abuse.

“Reproductive Justice, Not Just Rights”

Dorothy Roberts Published in Dissent Magazine (2015)

Dorothy Roberts, author of Killing the Black Body and Fatal Invention , describes attending the March for Women’s Lives. She was especially happy to be there because co-sponsor SisterSong (a collective founded by 16 organizations led by women of color) shifted the focus from “choice” to “social justice.” Why does this matter? Roberts argues that the rhetoric of “choice” favors women who have options that aren’t available to low-income women, especially women of color. Conservatives face criticism for their stance on reproductive rights, but liberals also cause harm when they frame birth control as the solution to global “overpopulation” or lean on fetal anomalies as an argument for abortion choice.

Instead of “the right to choose,” a reproductive justice framework is necessary. This requires a living wage, universal healthcare, and prison abolition. Reproductive justice goes beyond the current pro-choice/anti-choice rhetoric that still favors the privileged.

“The Color of Choice: White Supremacy and Reproductive Justice”

Loretta J. Ross, SisterSong Published in Color of Violence: The INCITE! Anthology (2016)

White supremacy in the United States has always created different outcomes for its ethnic populations. The method? Population control. Ross points out that even a glance at reproductive politics in the headlines makes it clear that some women are encouraged to have more children while others are discouraged. Ross defines “reproductive justice,” which goes beyond the concept of “rights.” Reproductive justice is when reproductive rights are “embedded in a human rights and social justice framework.”

In the essay, Ross explores topics like white supremacy and population control on both the right and left sides of politics. She acknowledges that while the right is often blunter in restricting women of color and their fertility, white supremacy is embedded in both political aisles. The essay closes with a section on mobilizing for reproductive justice, describing SisterSong (where Ross is a founding member) and the March for Women’s Lives in 2004.

“Abortion Care Is Not Just For Cis Women”

Sachiko Ragosta Published in Ms. Magazine (2021)

Cisgender women are the focus of abortion and reproductive health services even though nonbinary and trans people access these services all the time. In their essay, Ragosta describes the criticism Ibis Reproductive Health received when it used the term “pregnant people.” The term alienates women, the critics said, but acting as if only cis women need reproductive care is simply inaccurate. As Ragosta writes, no one is denying that cis women experience pregnancy. The reaction to more inclusive language around pregnancy and abortion reveals a clear bias against trans people.

Normalizing terms like “pregnant people” help spaces become more inclusive, whether it’s in research, medical offices, or in day-to-day life. Inclusiveness leads to better health outcomes, which is essential considering the barriers nonbinary and gender-expansive people face in general and sexual/reproductive care.

“We Cannot Leave Black Women, Trans People, and Gender Expansive People Behind: Why We Need Reproductive Justice”

Karla Mendez Published in Black Women Radicals

Mendez, a freelance writer and (and the time of the essay’s publication) a student studying Interdisciplinary Studies, Political Science, and Women’s and Gender Studies, responds to the Texas abortion ban. Terms like “reproductive rights” and “abortion rights” are part of the mainstream white feminist movement, but the benefits of birth control and abortions are not equal. Also, as the Texas ban shows, these benefits are not secure. In the face of this reality, it’s essential to center Black people of all genders.

In her essay, Mendez describes recent restrictive legislation and the failure of the reproductive rights movement to address anti-Blackness, transphobia, food insecurity, and more. Groups like SisterSong have led the way on reproductive justice. As reproductive rights are eroded in the United States, the reproductive rights movement needs to focus on justice.

“Gee’s Bend: A Reproductive Justice Quilt Story From the South”

Mary Lee Bendolph Published in Radical Reproductive Justice (2017)

One of Mary Lee Bendolph’s quilt designs appears as the cover of Radical Reproductive Justice. She was one of the most important strip quilters associated with Gee’s Bend, Alabama. During the Civil Rights era, the 700 residents of Gee’s Bend were isolated and found it hard to vote or gain educational and economic power outside the village. Bendolph’s work didn’t become well-known outside her town until the mid-1990s.

Through an interview by the Souls Grown Foundation, we learn that Bendolph didn’t receive any sex education as a girl. When she became pregnant in sixth grade, she had to stop attending school. “They say it was against the law for a lady to go to school and be pregnant,” she said, because it would influence the other kids. “Soon as you have a baby, you couldn’t never go to school again.”

“Underground Activists in Brazil Fight for Women’s Reproductive Rights”

Alejandra Marks Published in The North American Congress on Latin America (2021)

While short, this essay provides a good introduction to abortion activism in Brazil, where abortion is legal only in the case of rape, fetal anencephaly, or when a woman’s life is at risk. The reader meets “Taís,” a single mother faced with an unwanted pregnancy. With no legal options, she researched methods online, including teas and pills. She eventually connected with a lawyer and activist who walked her through using Cytotec, a medication she got online. The activist stayed on the phone while Taís completed her abortion at home.

For decades, Latin American activists have helped pregnant people get abortion medications while wealthy Brazilians enter private clinics or travel to other countries. Government intimidation makes activism risky, but the stakes are high. Hundreds of Brazilians die each year from dangerous abortion methods. In the past decade, religious conservatives in Congress have blocked even mild reform. Even if a new president is elected, Brazil’s abortion rights movement will fight an uphill battle.

“The Ambivalent Activist”

Lauren Groff Published in Fight of the Century: Writers Reflect on 100 years of Landmark ACLU Cases (2020)

Before Roe v. Wade, abortion regulation around the country was spotty. 37 states still had near-bans on the procedure while only four states had repealed anti-abortion laws completely. In her essay, Groff summarizes the case in accessible, engaging prose. The “Jane Roe” of the case was Norma McCorvey. When she got pregnant, she’d already had two children, one of whom she’d given up for adoption. McCorvey couldn’t access an abortion provider because the pregnancy didn’t endanger her life. She eventually connected with two attorneys: Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee. In 1973 on January 2, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that abortion was a fundamental right.

Norma McCorvey was a complicated woman. She later became an anti-choice activist (in an interview released after her death, she said Evangelical anti-choice groups paid her to switch her position), but as Groff writes, McCorvey had once been proud that it was her case that gave women bodily autonomy.

“The Abortion I Didn’t Want”

Caitlin McDonnell Published in Salon (2015) and Choice Words: Writers on Abortion (2020)

While talking about abortion is less demonized than in the past, it’s still fairly unusual to hear directly from people who’ve experienced it. It’s certainly unusual to hear more complicated stories. Caitlin McDonnell, a poet and teacher from Brooklyn, shares her experience. In clear, raw prose, this piece brings home what can be an abstract “issue” for people who haven’t experienced it or been close to someone who has.

In debates about abortion rights, those who carry the physical and emotional effects are often neglected. Their complicated feelings are weaponized to serve agendas or make judgments about others. It’s important to read essays like McDonnell’s and hear stories as nuanced and multi-faceted as humans themselves.

You may also like

15 Examples of Gender Inequality in Everyday Life

11 Approaches to Alleviate World Hunger 

15 Facts About Malala Yousafzai

12 Ways Poverty Affects Society

15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024

15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society

14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine

The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts

Social Change 101: Meaning, Examples, Learning Opportunities

Rosa Parks: Biography, Quotes, Impact

Top 20 Issues Women Are Facing Today

Top 20 Issues Children Are Facing Today

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news.

Key Facts on Abortion in the United States

Usha Ranji , Karen Diep , and Alina Salganicoff Published: Nov 21, 2023

Note: This brief was updated on January 4, 2024 to correct the description of the data collected by the federal CDC Abortion Surveillance System. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that overturned the constitutional right to abortion as well as the federal standards of abortion access, established by prior decisions in the cases Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey . Prior to the Dobbs ruling, the federal standard was that abortions were permitted up to fetal viability. That federal standard has been eliminated, allowing states to set policies regarding the legality of abortions and establish limits. Access to and availability of abortions varies widely between states , with some states banning almost all abortions and some states protecting abortion access.

This issue brief answers some key questions about abortion in the United States and presents data collected before and new data that was published shortly after the overturn of Roe v. Wade .

What is abortion?

How safe are abortions, how often do abortions occur, who gets abortions, at what point in pregnancy do abortions occur, where do people get abortion care, how much do abortions cost, does private insurance or medicaid cover abortions, what are public opinions about abortion.

Abortion is the medical termination of a pregnancy. It is a common medical service that many women obtain at some point in their life. There are different types of abortion methods, which the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM ) places in four categories:

• Medication Abortion – Medication abortion, also known as medical abortion or abortion with pills, is a pregnancy termination protocol that involves taking oral medications. There are two widely accepted protocols for medication abortion. In the U.S., the most common protocol involves taking two different drugs, Mifepristone and Misoprostol. Typically, an individual using medication abortion takes Mifepristone first, followed by misoprostol 24-48 hours later. In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved this protocol of medication abortion for use up to the first 70 days (10 weeks) of pregnancy, and its use has been rising for years. Another medication abortion protocol uses misoprostol alone . Patients can take 800 µg (4 pills) of misoprostol sublingually or vaginally every three hours for a total of 12 pills. The regimen is also recommended for up to 70 days (10 weeks) of pregnancy, but it is not currently approved by the FDA and is more commonly used in other countries.

Guttmacher Institute estimates that in 2020, medication was used for more than half (53%) of all abortions. While medication abortion has been available in the U.S. for more than 20 years, studies have found that many adults and women of reproductive age have not heard of medication abortion. Many have confused emergency contraception ( EC ) pills with medication abortion pills, but EC does not terminate a pregnancy. EC works by delaying or inhibiting ovulation and will not affect an established pregnancy.

• Aspiration , a minimally invasive and commonly used gynecological procedure, is the most common form of procedural abortion. It can be used to conduct abortions up to 14-16 weeks of gestation. Aspiration is also commonly used in cases of early pregnancy loss (miscarriage).
• Dilation and evacuation abortions (D&E) are usually performed after the 14th week of pregnancy. The cervix is dilated, and the pregnancy tissue is evacuated using forceps or suction.
• Induction abortions are rare and conducted later in pregnancy. They involve the use of medications to induce labor and delivery of the fetus.

( Back to top )

Decades of research have shown that abortion is a very safe medical service.

Despite its strong safety profile, abortion is the most highly regulated medical service in the country and is now banned in several states. In addition to bans on abortion altogether and telehealth, many states impose other limitations on abortion that are not medically indicated, including waiting periods, ultrasound requirements, gestational age limits, and parental notification and consent requirements. These restrictions typically delay receipt of services.

• NASEM completed an exhaustive review on the safety and effectiveness of abortion care and concluded that complications from abortion are rare and occur far less frequently than during childbirth.
• NASEM also concluded that safety is enhanced when the abortion is performed earlier in the pregnancy. State level restrictions such as waiting periods, ultrasound requirements, and gestational limits that impede access and delay abortion provision likely make abortions less safe.
• When medication abortion pills, which account for the majority of abortions, are administered at 9 weeks’ gestation or less, the pregnancy is terminated successfully 99.6% of the time, with a 0.4% risk of major complications, and an associated mortality rate of less than 0.001 percent (0.00064%).
• Medication abortion pills can be provided in a clinical setting or via telehealth (without an in-person visit). Research has found that the provision of medication abortion via telehealth is as safe and effective as the provision of the pills at an in person visit.
• Studies on procedural abortions, which include aspiration and D&E, have also found that they are very safe. Research on aspiration abortions, the most common procedural method, have found the rate of major complications of less than 1%.

There are three major data sources on abortion incidence and the characteristics of people who obtain abortions in the U.S: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Guttmacher Institute, and most recently, the Society of Family Planning’s (SFP) #WeCount project.

The federal CDC Abortion Surveillance System requests data from the central health agencies of the 50 states, DC, and New York City to document the number and characteristics of women obtaining abortions. Most states collect data from facilities where abortions are provided on the demographic characteristics of patients, gestational age, and type of abortion procedure. Reporting these data to the CDC is voluntary and not all states participate in the surveillance system. Notably, California, Maryland, and New Hampshire have not reported data on abortions to the CDC system for years. CDC publishes available data from the surveillance system annually.

Guttmacher Institute , an independent research and advocacy organization, is another major source of data on abortions in the U.S. Prior to the Dobbs ruling, Guttmacher conducted the Abortion Provider Census (APC) periodically which has provided data on abortion incidence, abortion facilities, and characteristics of abortion patients. Data from this Census are based primarily on questionnaires collected from all known facilities that provide abortion in the country, information obtained from state health departments, and Guttmacher estimates for a small portion of facilities. The most recent APC reports data from 2020.

The CDC and Guttmacher data differ in terms of methods, timeframe, and completeness, but both have shown similar trends in abortion rates over the past decade. One notable difference is that Guttmacher’s study includes continuous reporting from California, D.C., Maryland, and New Hampshire, which explains at least in part the higher number of abortions in their data.

Since the Dobbs ruling, the Guttmacher Institute has established the Monthly Abortion Provision Study to track abortion volume within the formal United States health care system. This ongoing effort collects data on and provides national and state-level estimates on procedural and medication abortions while also tracking the changes in abortion volume since 2020. The Monthly Abortion Provision Study was designed to complement Guttmacher’s APC along with other data collection efforts to allow for quick snapshots of the changing abortion landscape in the United States.

Society of Family Planning’s (SFP) #WeCount is another national reporting effort that measures changes in abortion access following the Dobbs ruling. The project reports on the number of abortions per month by state and includes data on abortions provided through clinics, private practices, hospitals, and virtual-only providers. The report does not include data on self-managed abortions that are performed without clinical supervision. The most recent #WeCount report analyzes data from April 2022 to data from June 2023, marking one full year of abortion data since Dobbs. The effort represents 83% of all providers known to #WeCount who agreed to participate in their research.

This KFF issue brief uses data from the CDC, Guttmacher, and SFP as well as other research organizations.

How has the abortion rate changed over time?

For most of the decade prior to the Dobbs ruling, there was a steady decline in abortion rates nationally, but there was a slight increase in the years just before the ruling.

In their most recent national data, Guttmacher Institute reported 930,160 abortions in 2020 and a rate of 14.4 per 1,000 women. CDC reported 622,108 abortions in 2021 and a rate of 11.6 abortions per 1,000 women (excludes CA, DC, MD, NH). Guttmacher’s study showed an upward trend in abortion from 2017 to 2020 whereas CDC’s report showed an increase in abortions from 2017 to 2021 except for a slight decrease in 2020.

While most attribute the long-term decline in abortion rates to increased use of more effective methods of contraception , several states had reduced access to low- or no-cost contraceptive care as a result of reductions in the Title X network under the Trump Administration, which may have contributed to the slight rise in abortions prior to the Dobbs ruling. Other factors that may have contributed to the increase could include greater coverage under Medicaid that subsequently made abortions more affordable in some states and broader financial support from abortion funds to help individuals pay for the costs of abortion care.

Even prior to the Dobbs ruling, abortion rates varied widely between states.

National averages can mask local and more granular differences. Lower state-level abortion rates do not reflect less need. Some of the variation has been due to the wide differences in state policies, with some states historically placing restrictions on abortion that make access and availability to nearly out of reach and, on the other side, some states enshrining protections in state Constitutions and legislation.

• In 2020, the abortion rate (per 1,000 women ages 15-44) ranged from 0.1 in Missouri to 48.9 in the District of Columbia (DC). Trends also varied between states. While the national rate of abortion increased between 2017 and 2019, some states saw declines, with particularly sharp drops in states where heavy restrictions were put into place.

While the number of abortions in the U.S. dropped immediately following the Dobbs decision, new data show that the number of abortions increased overall one year following the ruling. However, the upswing obscures the declines in abortion care in states with bans.

SFP’s #WeCount estimates there were 2,200 cumulative more abortions in the year following Dobbs (July 2022 to June 2023) compared to the pre- Dobbs period (April 2022 and May 2022). Nationally, the number of abortions varied month-by-month, with the largest decrease observed in November 2022 (73,930 abortions; 8,185 fewer abortions than pre- Dobbs period ) and the largest increase in March 2023 (92,680 abortions; 10,565 more abortions than pre- Dobbs period). The states with the largest cumulative increases in the total number of abortions provided by a clinician during the 12-month period include Illinois, Florida, North Carolina, California, and New Mexico. States with abortion bans experienced the largest cumulative decreases in the number of abortions, including Texas, Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana (data varies by month in each state; data not shown).

States without abortion bans experienced an increase of abortions following the Dobbs ruling likely due to a combination of reasons: increased interstate travel for abortion access, expanded in-person and virtual/telehealth capacity to see patients, increased measures to protect and cover abortion care for residents and out-of-state patients, and potentially reduced abortion-related stigma as a result of community mobilization around abortion care.

However, the overall national increase in the number of abortions masks the absence and/or scarcity of abortion care in states with total abortion bans or severe restrictions. States with total bans experienced observed 94,930 fewer clinician-provided abortions a year following the ruling (data not shown). Note, this figure is an underestimate due several state policies that restricted abortion access during the pre- Dobbs period. These estimates do not include abortions that may have been performed through self-managed means.

Most of the information about people who receive abortions comes from data prior to the Dobbs ruling. In 2021, women across a range of age groups, socioeconomic status, and racial and ethnic backgrounds obtained abortions, but the majority were obtained by women who were in their twenties, low-income, and women of color.

• Women in their twenties accounted for more than half (57%) of abortions. Nearly one-third (31%) were among women in their thirties and a small share were among women in their 40s (4%) and teens (8%).
• Seven in ten abortion patients were of women of color. Black women comprised 42% of abortion recipients, White women 30% , Hispanic women 22%, and 7% women of other races/ethnicities.
• Many women who sought abortions have children. More than six in 10 (61%) abortion patients in 2021 had at least one previous birth.

The vast majority (94%) of abortions occur during the first trimester of pregnancy according to data available from before the Dobbs decision.

Before the 2022 ruling in Dobbs, there was a federal constitutional right to abortion before the pregnancy is considered to be viable, that is, can survive outside of a pregnant person’s uterus. Viability is generally considered around 24 weeks of pregnancy. Most abortions, though, occur well before the point of fetal viability.

• Data from 2021 found that more than four in ten (45%) abortions occurred by six weeks of gestation, a third (36%) occurred between seven and nine weeks, and 13% at 10-13 weeks. Just 7% of abortions occurred after the first trimester.
• Prior to the decision in the Dobbs case, almost half of states (22) had enacted laws that ban abortion at a certain gestational age. Most of these limits are in the second trimester, but some are in the first trimester, well before fetal viability. Many of these laws were blocked because they violated the federal standard established by Roe v Wade. Some states have enacted laws banning abortions after fetal cardiac activity can be detected, or around 6 weeks of pregnancy, which is often before a person knows they are pregnant. In addition to banning abortion, states can now establish pre-viability gestational restrictions because the federal standard has been overturned.

Just over half of abortions were provided at clinics that specialize in abortion care in 2020. Others were provided at clinics that offer abortion care in addition to other family planning services.

Guttmacher Institute estimated that 96% of abortions were provided at clinics and just 4% were provided in doctors’ offices or hospitals in 2020. Most clinic-based abortions were provided at clinics that specialize in providing abortion care, but many were provided at clinics that offer a wide range of other sexual and reproductive health services like contraception and STI care. Most abortions are provided by physicians. However, in 19 states and D.C., Advanced Practice Clinicians (APCs) such as Nurse Practitioners and midwives may provide medication abortions. Conversely, 31 states prohibit clinicians other than physicians from providing abortion care.

Even prior to the ruling in Dobbs , access to abortion services was very uneven across the country though. The proliferation of restrictions in many states, particularly in the South, had greatly shrunk the availability of services in some areas. In the wake of overturning Roe v. Wade , these geographic disparities are likely to widen as more states ban abortion services altogether.

Telehealth has grown as a delivery mechanism for abortion services.

While procedural abortions must be provided in a clinical setting, medication abortion can be provided in a clinical setting or via telehealth. Access to medication abortion via telehealth had been limited for many years by a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restriction that had permitted only certified clinicians to dispense mifepristone in a health care setting. The drug could not be mailed or picked up at a retail pharmacy. However, in December 2021, the FDA permanently revised its policy and no longer requires clinicians to dispense the drug in person. Additionally, in January 2023, the FDA finalized a change that allows retail pharmacies to dispense medication abortion pills to patients with a prescription.

While some states are regulating the use of mifepristone as an abortion method, the Biden Administration has asserted that the FDA has regulatory power over all drugs, including mifepristone. This could result in future legal action as the authority of the state to regulate health care will be pitted against the authority of the federal government to regulate drugs through the FDA will be contested.

• In a telehealth abortion, the patient typically completes an online questionnaire to assess (1) confirmation of pregnancy, (2) gestational age and (3) blood type. If determined eligible by a remote clinician, the patient is mailed the medications. This model does not require an ultrasound for pregnancy dating if the patient has regular periods and is sure of the date of their last menstrual period (in line with  ACOG ’s guidelines for pregnancy dating). If the patient has irregular periods or is unsure how long they have been pregnant, they must obtain an ultrasound to confirm gestational age and rule out an ectopic pregnancy 3 and send in the images for review before receiving their medications. If the patient does not know their blood type or has Rh negative blood, the  provider  may prompt the patient to visit a nearby clinic for an injection to prevent adverse reactions between maternal and fetal blood ( RhoGAM ), The follow-up visit with a clinician can also happen via a telehealth visit.
• However, even in some of the states that have not banned abortion altogether, telehealth may not be available. Many states had established restrictions prior to the Dobbs ruling that limit the use of telehealth abortions by either requiring abortion patients to take the pills at a physical clinic, require ultrasounds for all abortions, set their own policies regarding the dispensing of the medications used for abortion care, or directly ban the use of telehealth for abortion care. As of November 2022, of the 33 states that have not banned abortion, eight had at least one of these restrictions, effectively prohibiting telehealth for medication abortion.
• Medication abortion has emerged as a major legal front in the battle over abortion access across the nation. Multiple cases have been filed in federal courts regarding aspects of the FDA’s regulation of medication abortion as well as the mailing of medications. One notable ongoing case is Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA , where the plaintiffs are challenging the FDA’s authority and approval process for mifepristone. The plaintiffs also contend that an 1873 anti-obscenity law, the Comstock Act, prohibits the mailing of any medication used for abortion. In April 2023, a US Supreme Court ruling allowed current FDA rules to remain in effect as the case proceeds through the courts. This means that mifepristone remains available for medication abortion either in a clinic or via telehealth where state law permits.

Data from SFP’s October 2023 #WeCount report show that abortions provided by virtual-only clinics represent approximately 5% of all abortions post- Roe . The number of telehealth abortions increased 72% from a monthly average of 4,045 abortions in April and May 2022 to 6,950 abortions per month in the 12 months post- Dobbs . Nearly all of these abortions occurred in states that permit abortions.

Self-managed abortions are provided without a clinician visit.

Self-managed abortions typically involve obtaining medication abortion pills from an online pharmacy that will send the pills by mail or by purchasing the pills from a pharmacy in another country. This does not typically involve a direct consultation with a clinician either in person or via telehealth.

Research has found that prior to Dobbs , more than one in ten patients who obtained abortions at clinics had considered self-managing their abortions. This is likely to increase going forward since abortion care is not available in many states, and there have already been reports of people ordering pills from online markets outside the U.S. medical system. Tracking information on these online orders can help fill in gaps in abortion count estimates but can also be difficult. Some companies may not share data on purchases, and it would also be unclear whether patients take the abortion medication after receiving it in the mail.

The median costs of abortion services exceed $500.

Obtaining an abortion can be costly. On average, the costs are higher for abortions in the second trimester than in the first trimester. State restrictions can also raise the costs, as people may have to travel if abortions are prohibited or not available in their area. Many people pay for abortion services out of pocket, but some people can obtain assistance from local abortion funds.

• In 2021, the median costs for people paying out of pocket in the first trimester were $568 for a medication abortion and $625 for a procedural abortion. The Federal Reserve estimates that nationally about one-third of people do not have $400 on hand for unexpected expenses. For low-income people, who are more likely to need abortion care, these costs are often unaffordable.
• The costs of abortion are higher in the second trimester compared to the first, with median self-pay of $775. In the second trimester, more intensive procedures may be needed, more are likely to be conducted in a hospital setting (although still a minority), and local options are more limited in many communities that have fewer facilities. This results in additional nonmedical costs for transportation, childcare, lodging, and lost wages. nonmedical costs for transportation, childcare, lodging, and lost wages.
• Abortion funds are independent organizations that help some people pay for the costs of abortion services. Most abortion funds are regional and have connections to clinics in their area. Funds vary, but they typically provide assistance with the costs of medical care, travel, and accommodations if needed. However, they do not reach all people seeking services, and many people are not able to afford the costs of obtaining an abortion because they cannot pay for the abortion itself or cover the costs of travel, lodging or missed work.

Insurance coverage for abortion services is heavily restricted in certain private insurance plans and public programs like Medicaid and Medicare.

Private insurance covers most women of reproductive age, and states have the responsibility to regulate fully insured private plans in their state, whereas the federal government regulates self-funded plans under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). States can choose whether abortion coverage is included or excluded in private plans that are not self-insured.

• Prior to the Dobbs ruling, several states had enacted private plan restrictions and banned abortion coverage from ACA Marketplace plans. Currently, there are 11 states that have policies restricting abortion coverage in private plans and 26 that ban coverage in any Marketplace plans. Since the Dobbs ruling, some of these states have also banned the provision of abortion services altogether.
• A handful of states ( 9 ), however, have enacted laws that require private plans to cover abortion.
• The Medicaid program covers approximately one in five women of reproductive age and four in ten who are low-income. For decades, the Hyde Amendment has banned the use of federal funds for abortion in Medicaid and other public programs unless the pregnancy is a result of rape, incest, or it endangers the woman’s life.
• States have the option to use state-only funds to cover abortions under other circumstances for women on Medicaid, which 16 states do currently. However, more than half (56% ) of women covered by Medicaid live in Hyde states.
• According to a Guttmacher Institute survey of patients in the year prior to the Dobbs ruling, a quarter (26%) of abortion patients in the study used Medicaid to pay for abortion services, 11% used private insurance, and 60% paid out of pocket. People in states with more restrictive abortion policies were less likely to use Medicaid or private insurance and more likely to pay out of pocket compared to people living in less restrictive states.
• Federal law also restricts abortion funding under the Indian Health Service, Medicare, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. Over the years, language similar to that in the Hyde Amendment has been incorporated into a range of other federal programs that provide or pay for health services to women including: the military’s TRICARE program, federal prisons, the Peace Corps, and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

National polls have consistently found that a majority of the public did not want to see Roe v . Wade overturned and that most people feel that abortion is a personal medical decision. The public also strongly opposes the criminalization of abortion both among people who get abortion and the clinicians who provide abortion services. Nearly three quarters of adults (74%) and 79% of reproductive age women say that obtaining an abortion should be a personal choice rather than regulated by law (data not shown). For example, two-thirds of the public are concerned that bans on abortion may lead to unnecessary health problems for people experiencing pregnancy complications.

Additional KFF resources:

Abortion in the US Dashboard

Access and Coverage of Abortion Services

Issue Brief: Abortion at SCOTUS: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health

Issue Brief: State Actions to Protect and Expand Access to Abortion Services

Policy Watch: A Year After Dobbs: Policies Restricting Access to Abortion in States Even Where It’s Not Banned

Policy Watch: Employer Coverage of Travel Costs for Out-of-State Abortion

Issue Brief: Exclusion of Abortion Coverage from Employer-Sponsored Health Plans

Interactive: How State Policies Shape Access to Abortion Coverage

Medication Abortion

Issue Brief: Legal Challenges to the FDA Approval of Medication Abortion Pills

Infographic: The Availability and Use of Medication Abortion Care

Fact Sheet: The Availability and Use of Medication Abortion

Issue Brief: The Intersection of State and Federal Policies on Access to Medication Abortion Via Telehealth

Public Opinion on Abortion

Web Event: Americans’ Knowledge and Attitudes About Abortion Access and The Pending Supreme Court Ruling

KFF Health Tracking Poll: Early 2023 Update On Public Awareness On Abortion and Emergency Contraception

KFF Health Tracking Poll: Views on and Knowledge about Abortion in Wake of Leaked Supreme Court Opinion

Other Resources on Women’s Health

Interactive: State Profiles for Women’s Health

Interactive: State Health Facts on Women’s Health Indicators

Homepage: Women’s Health Policy

• Women's Health Policy
• Access to Care

Also of Interest

• The Availability and Use of Medication Abortion
• State Actions to Protect and Expand Access to Abortion Services
• Legal Challenges to State Abortion Bans Since the Dobbs Decision
• Legal Challenges to the FDA Approval of Medication Abortion Pills
• Employer Coverage of Travel Costs for Out-of-State Abortion
• Abortion in the United States Dashboard

Princeton Legal Journal

The First Amendment and the Abortion Rights Debate

Sofia Cipriano

Following Dobbs v. Jackson ’s (2022) reversal of Roe v. Wade (1973) — and the subsequent revocation of federal abortion protection — activists and scholars have begun to reconsider how to best ground abortion rights in the Constitution. In the past year, numerous Jewish rights groups have attempted to overturn state abortion bans by arguing that abortion rights are protected by various state constitutions’ free exercise clauses — and, by extension, the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. While reframing the abortion rights debate as a question of religious freedom is undoubtedly strategic, the Free Exercise Clause is not the only place to locate abortion rights: the Establishment Clause also warrants further investigation. 

Roe anchored abortion rights in the right to privacy — an unenumerated right with a long history of legal recognition. In various cases spanning the past two centuries, t he Supreme Court located the right to privacy in the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments . Roe classified abortion as a fundamental right protected by strict scrutiny, meaning that states could only regulate abortion in the face of a “compelling government interest” and must narrowly tailor legislation to that end. As such, Roe ’s trimester framework prevented states from placing burdens on abortion access in the first few months of pregnancy. After the fetus crosses the viability line — the point at which the fetus can survive outside the womb  — states could pass laws regulating abortion, as the Court found that   “the potentiality of human life”  constitutes a “compelling” interest. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) later replaced strict scrutiny with the weaker “undue burden” standard, giving states greater leeway to restrict abortion access. Dobbs v. Jackson overturned both Roe and Casey , leaving abortion regulations up to individual states. 

While Roe constituted an essential step forward in terms of abortion rights, weaknesses in its argumentation made it more susceptible to attacks by skeptics of substantive due process. Roe argues that the unenumerated right to abortion is implied by the unenumerated right to privacy — a chain of logic which twice removes abortion rights from the Constitution’s language. Moreover, Roe’s trimester framework was unclear and flawed from the beginning, lacking substantial scientific rationale. As medicine becomes more and more advanced, the arbitrariness of the viability line has grown increasingly apparent.  

As abortion rights supporters have looked for alternative constitutional justifications for abortion rights, the First Amendment has become increasingly more visible. Certain religious groups — particularly Jewish groups — have argued that they have a right to abortion care. In Generation to Generation Inc v. Florida , a religious rights group argued that Florida’s abortion ban (HB 5) constituted a violation of the Florida State Constitution: “In Jewish law, abortion is required if necessary to protect the health, mental or physical well-being of the woman, or for many other reasons not permitted under the Act. As such, the Act prohibits Jewish women from practicing their faith free of government intrusion and thus violates their privacy rights and religious freedom.” Similar cases have arisen in Indiana and Texas. Absent constitutional protection of abortion rights, the Christian religious majorities in many states may unjustly impose their moral and ethical code on other groups, implying an unconstitutional religious hierarchy. 

Cases like Generation to Generation Inc v. Florida may also trigger heightened scrutiny status in higher courts; The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (1993) places strict scrutiny on cases which “burden any aspect of religious observance or practice.”

But framing the issue as one of Free Exercise does not interact with major objections to abortion rights. Anti-abortion advocates contend that abortion is tantamount to murder. An anti-abortion advocate may argue that just as religious rituals involving human sacrifice are illegal, so abortion ought to be illegal. Anti-abortion advocates may be able to argue that abortion bans hold up against strict scrutiny since “preserving potential life” constitutes a “compelling interest.”

The question of when life begins—which is fundamentally a moral and religious question—is both essential to the abortion debate and often ignored by left-leaning activists. For select Christian advocacy groups (as well as other anti-abortion groups) who believe that life begins at conception, abortion bans are a deeply moral issue. Abortion bans which operate under the logic that abortion is murder essentially legislate a definition of when life begins, which is problematic from a First Amendment perspective; the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prevents the government from intervening in religious debates. While numerous legal thinkers have associated the abortion debate with the First Amendment, this argument has not been fully litigated. As an amicus brief filed in Dobbs by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Center for Inquiry, and American Atheists  points out, anti-abortion rhetoric is explicitly religious: “There is hardly a secular veil to the religious intent and positions of individuals, churches, and state actors in their attempts to limit access to abortion.” Justice Stevens located a similar issue with anti-abortion rhetoric in his concurring opinion in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) , stating: “I am persuaded that the absence of any secular purpose for the legislative declarations that life begins at conception and that conception occurs at fertilization makes the relevant portion of the preamble invalid under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Federal Constitution.” Judges who justify their judicial decisions on abortion using similar rhetoric blur the line between church and state. 

Framing the abortion debate around religious freedom would thus address the two main categories of arguments made by anti-abortion activists: arguments centered around issues with substantive due process and moral objections to abortion. 

Conservatives may maintain, however, that legalizing abortion on the federal level is an Establishment Clause violation to begin with, since the government would essentially be imposing a federal position on abortion. Many anti-abortion advocates favor leaving abortion rights up to individual states. However, in the absence of recognized federal, constitutional protection of abortion rights, states will ban abortion. Protecting religious freedom of the individual is of the utmost importance  — the United States government must actively intervene in order to uphold the line between church and state. Protecting abortion rights would allow everyone in the United States to act in accordance with their own moral and religious perspectives on abortion. 

Reframing the abortion rights debate as a question of religious freedom is the most viable path forward. Anchoring abortion rights in the Establishment Clause would ensure Americans have the right to maintain their own personal and religious beliefs regarding the question of when life begins. In the short term, however, litigants could take advantage of Establishment Clauses in state constitutions. Yet, given the swing of the Court towards expanding religious freedom protections at the time of writing, Free Exercise arguments may prove better at securing citizens a right to an abortion. 

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

Find anything you save across the site in your account

How the Right to Legal Abortion Changed the Arc of All Women’s Lives

By Katha Pollitt

I’ve never had an abortion. In this, I am like most American women. A frequently quoted statistic from a recent study by the Guttmacher Institute, which reports that one in four women will have an abortion before the age of forty-five, may strike you as high, but it means that a large majority of women never need to end a pregnancy. (Indeed, the abortion rate has been declining for decades, although it’s disputed how much of that decrease is due to better birth control, and wider use of it, and how much to restrictions that have made abortions much harder to get.) Now that the Supreme Court seems likely to overturn Roe v. Wade sometime in the next few years—Alabama has passed a near-total ban on abortion, and Ohio, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Missouri have passed “heartbeat” bills that, in effect, ban abortion later than six weeks of pregnancy, and any of these laws, or similar ones, could prove the catalyst—I wonder if women who have never needed to undergo the procedure, and perhaps believe that they never will, realize the many ways that the legal right to abortion has undergirded their lives.

Legal abortion means that the law recognizes a woman as a person. It says that she belongs to herself. Most obviously, it means that a woman has a safe recourse if she becomes pregnant as a result of being raped. (Believe it or not, in some states, the law allows a rapist to sue for custody or visitation rights.) It means that doctors no longer need to deny treatment to pregnant women with certain serious conditions—cancer, heart disease, kidney disease—until after they’ve given birth, by which time their health may have deteriorated irretrievably. And it means that non-Catholic hospitals can treat a woman promptly if she is having a miscarriage. (If she goes to a Catholic hospital, she may have to wait until the embryo or fetus dies. In one hospital, in Ireland, such a delay led to the death of a woman named Savita Halappanavar, who contracted septicemia. Her case spurred a movement to repeal that country’s constitutional amendment banning abortion.)

The legalization of abortion, though, has had broader and more subtle effects than limiting damage in these grave but relatively uncommon scenarios. The revolutionary advances made in the social status of American women during the nineteen-seventies are generally attributed to the availability of oral contraception, which came on the market in 1960. But, according to a 2017 study by the economist Caitlin Knowles Myers, “The Power of Abortion Policy: Re-Examining the Effects of Young Women’s Access to Reproductive Control,” published in the Journal of Political Economy , the effects of the Pill were offset by the fact that more teens and women were having sex, and so birth-control failure affected more people. Complicating the conventional wisdom that oral contraception made sex risk-free for all, the Pill was also not easy for many women to get. Restrictive laws in some states barred it for unmarried women and for women under the age of twenty-one. The Roe decision, in 1973, afforded thousands upon thousands of teen-agers a chance to avoid early marriage and motherhood. Myers writes, “Policies governing access to the pill had little if any effect on the average probabilities of marrying and giving birth at a young age. In contrast, policy environments in which abortion was legal and readily accessible by young women are estimated to have caused a 34 percent reduction in first births, a 19 percent reduction in first marriages, and a 63 percent reduction in ‘shotgun marriages’ prior to age 19.”

Access to legal abortion, whether as a backup to birth control or not, meant that women, like men, could have a sexual life without risking their future. A woman could plan her life without having to consider that it could be derailed by a single sperm. She could dream bigger dreams. Under the old rules, inculcated from girlhood, if a woman got pregnant at a young age, she married her boyfriend; and, expecting early marriage and kids, she wouldn’t have invested too heavily in her education in any case, and she would have chosen work that she could drop in and out of as family demands required.

In 1970, the average age of first-time American mothers was younger than twenty-two. Today, more women postpone marriage until they are ready for it. (Early marriages are notoriously unstable, so, if you’re glad that the divorce rate is down, you can, in part, thank Roe.) Women can also postpone childbearing until they are prepared for it, which takes some serious doing in a country that lacks paid parental leave and affordable childcare, and where discrimination against pregnant women and mothers is still widespread. For all the hand-wringing about lower birth rates, most women— eighty-six per cent of them —still become mothers. They just do it later, and have fewer children.

Most women don’t enter fields that require years of graduate-school education, but all women have benefitted from having larger numbers of women in those fields. It was female lawyers, for example, who brought cases that opened up good blue-collar jobs to women. Without more women obtaining law degrees, would men still be shaping all our legislation? Without the large numbers of women who have entered the medical professions, would psychiatrists still be telling women that they suffered from penis envy and were masochistic by nature? Would women still routinely undergo unnecessary hysterectomies? Without increased numbers of women in academia, and without the new field of women’s studies, would children still be taught, as I was, that, a hundred years ago this month, Woodrow Wilson “gave” women the vote? There has been a revolution in every field, and the women in those fields have led it.

It is frequently pointed out that the states passing abortion restrictions and bans are states where women’s status remains particularly low. Take Alabama. According to one study , by almost every index—pay, workforce participation, percentage of single mothers living in poverty, mortality due to conditions such as heart disease and stroke—the state scores among the worst for women. Children don’t fare much better: according to U.S. News rankings , Alabama is the worst state for education. It also has one of the nation’s highest rates of infant mortality (only half the counties have even one ob-gyn), and it has refused to expand Medicaid, either through the Affordable Care Act or on its own. Only four women sit in Alabama’s thirty-five-member State Senate, and none of them voted for the ban. Maybe that’s why an amendment to the bill proposed by State Senator Linda Coleman-Madison was voted down. It would have provided prenatal care and medical care for a woman and child in cases where the new law prevents the woman from obtaining an abortion. Interestingly, the law allows in-vitro fertilization, a procedure that often results in the discarding of fertilized eggs. As Clyde Chambliss, the bill’s chief sponsor in the state senate, put it, “The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not in a woman. She’s not pregnant.” In other words, life only begins at conception if there’s a woman’s body to control.

Indifference to women and children isn’t an oversight. This is why calls for better sex education and wider access to birth control are non-starters, even though they have helped lower the rate of unwanted pregnancies, which is the cause of abortion. The point isn’t to prevent unwanted pregnancy. (States with strong anti-abortion laws have some of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in the country; Alabama is among them.) The point is to roll back modernity for women.

So, if women who have never had an abortion, and don’t expect to, think that the new restrictions and bans won’t affect them, they are wrong. The new laws will fall most heavily on poor women, disproportionately on women of color, who have the highest abortion rates and will be hard-pressed to travel to distant clinics.

But without legal, accessible abortion, the assumptions that have shaped all women’s lives in the past few decades—including that they, not a torn condom or a missed pill or a rapist, will decide what happens to their bodies and their futures—will change. Women and their daughters will have a harder time, and there will be plenty of people who will say that they were foolish to think that it could be otherwise.

By signing up, you agree to our User Agreement and Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

By Jia Tolentino

By Isaac Chotiner

By Stephania Taladrid

There’s a Better Way to Debate Abortion

Caution and epistemic humility can guide our approach.

If Justice Samuel Alito’s draft majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization becomes law, we will enter a post– Roe v. Wade world in which the laws governing abortion will be legislatively decided in 50 states.

In the short term, at least, the abortion debate will become even more inflamed than it has been. Overturning Roe , after all, would be a profound change not just in the law but in many people’s lives, shattering the assumption of millions of Americans that they have a constitutional right to an abortion.

This doesn’t mean Roe was correct. For the reasons Alito lays out, I believe that Roe was a terribly misguided decision, and that a wiser course would have been for the issue of abortion to have been given a democratic outlet, allowing even the losers “the satisfaction of a fair hearing and an honest fight,” in the words of the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Instead, for nearly half a century, Roe has been the law of the land. But even those who would welcome its undoing should acknowledge that its reversal could convulse the nation.

From the December 2019 issue: The dishonesty of the abortion debate

If we are going to debate abortion in every state, given how fractured and angry America is today, we need caution and epistemic humility to guide our approach.

We can start by acknowledging the inescapable ambiguities in this staggeringly complicated moral question. No matter one’s position on abortion, each of us should recognize that those who hold views different from our own have some valid points, and that the positions we embrace raise complicated issues. That realization alone should lead us to engage in this debate with a little more tolerance and a bit less certitude.

Many of those on the pro-life side exhibit a gap between the rhetoric they employ and the conclusions they actually seem to draw. In the 1990s, I had an exchange, via fax, with a pro-life thinker. During our dialogue, I pressed him on what he believed, morally speaking , should be the legal penalty for a woman who has an abortion and a doctor who performs one.

My point was a simple one: If he believed, as he claimed, that an abortion even moments after conception is the killing of an innocent child—that the fetus, from the instant of conception, is a human being deserving of all the moral and political rights granted to your neighbor next door—then the act ought to be treated, if not as murder, at least as manslaughter. Surely, given what my interlocutor considered to be the gravity of the offense, fining the doctor and taking no action against the mother would be morally incongruent. He was understandably uncomfortable with this line of questioning, unwilling to go to the places his premises led. When it comes to abortion, few people are.

Humane pro-life advocates respond that while an abortion is the taking of a human life, the woman having the abortion has been misled by our degraded culture into denying the humanity of the child. She is a victim of misinformation; she can’t be held accountable for what she doesn’t know. I’m not unsympathetic to this argument, but I think it ultimately falls short. In other contexts, insisting that people who committed atrocities because they truly believed the people against whom they were committing atrocities were less than human should be let off the hook doesn’t carry the day. I’m struggling to understand why it would in this context.

There are other complicating matters. For example, about half of all fertilized eggs are aborted spontaneously —that is, result in miscarriage—usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Focus on the Family, an influential Christian ministry, is emphatic : “Human life begins at fertilization.” Does this mean that when a fertilized egg is spontaneously aborted, it is comparable—biologically, morally, ethically, or in any other way—to when a 2-year-old child dies? If not, why not? There’s also the matter of those who are pro-life and contend that abortion is the killing of an innocent human being but allow for exceptions in the case of rape or incest. That is an understandable impulse but I don’t think it’s a logically sustainable one.

The pro-choice side, for its part, seldom focuses on late-term abortions. Let’s grant that late-term abortions are very rare. But the question remains: Is there any point during gestation when pro-choice advocates would say “slow down” or “stop”—and if so, on what grounds? Or do they believe, in principle, that aborting a child up to the point of delivery is a defensible and justifiable act; that an abortion procedure is, ethically speaking, the same as removing an appendix? If not, are those who are pro-choice willing to say, as do most Americans, that the procedure gets more ethically problematic the further along in a pregnancy?

Read: When a right becomes a privilege

Plenty of people who consider themselves pro-choice have over the years put on their refrigerator door sonograms of the baby they are expecting. That tells us something. So does biology. The human embryo is a human organism, with the genetic makeup of a human being. “The argument, in which thoughtful people differ, is about the moral significance and hence the proper legal status of life in its early stages,” as the columnist George Will put it.

These are not “gotcha questions”; they are ones I have struggled with for as long as I’ve thought through where I stand on abortion, and I’ve tried to remain open to corrections in my thinking. I’m not comfortable with those who are unwilling to grant any concessions to the other side or acknowledge difficulties inherent in their own position. But I’m not comfortable with my own position, either—thinking about abortion taking place on a continuum, and troubled by abortions, particularly later in pregnancy, as the child develops.

The question I can’t answer is where the moral inflection point is, when the fetus starts to have claims of its own, including the right to life. Does it depend on fetal development? If so, what aspect of fetal development? Brain waves? Feeling pain? Dreaming? The development of the spine? Viability outside the womb? Something else? Any line I might draw seems to me entirely arbitrary and capricious.

Because of that, I consider myself pro-life, but with caveats. My inability to identify a clear demarcation point—when a fetus becomes a person—argues for erring on the side of protecting the unborn. But it’s a prudential judgment, hardly a certain one.

At the same time, even if one believes that the moral needle ought to lean in the direction of protecting the unborn from abortion, that doesn’t mean one should be indifferent to the enormous burden on the woman who is carrying the child and seeks an abortion, including women who discover that their unborn child has severe birth defects. Nor does it mean that all of us who are disturbed by abortion believe it is the equivalent of killing a child after birth. In this respect, my view is similar to that of some Jewish authorities , who hold that until delivery, a fetus is considered a part of the mother’s body, although it does possess certain characteristics of a person and has value. But an early-term abortion is not equivalent to killing a young child. (Many of those who hold this position base their views in part on Exodus 21, in which a miscarriage that results from men fighting and pushing a pregnant woman is punished by a fine, but the person responsible for the miscarriage is not tried for murder.)

“There is not the slightest recognition on either side that abortion might be at the limits of our empirical and moral knowledge,” the columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote in 1985. “The problem starts with an awesome mystery: the transformation of two soulless cells into a living human being. That leads to an insoluble empirical question: How and exactly when does that occur? On that, in turn, hangs the moral issue: What are the claims of the entity undergoing that transformation?”

That strikes me as right; with abortion, we’re dealing with an awesome mystery and insoluble empirical questions. Which means that rather than hurling invective at one another and caricaturing those with whom we disagree, we should try to understand their views, acknowledge our limitations, and even show a touch of grace and empathy. In this nation, riven and pulsating with hate, that’s not the direction the debate is most likely to take. But that doesn’t excuse us from trying.

Persuasive Essay Guide

Persuasive Essay About Abortion

Crafting a Convincing Persuasive Essay About Abortion

People also read

A Comprehensive Guide to Writing an Effective Persuasive Essay

200+ Persuasive Essay Topics to Help You Out

Learn How to Create a Persuasive Essay Outline

30+ Free Persuasive Essay Examples To Get You Started

Read Excellent Examples of Persuasive Essay About Gun Control

How to Write a Persuasive Essay About Covid19 | Examples & Tips

Learn to Write Persuasive Essay About Business With Examples and Tips

Check Out 12 Persuasive Essay About Online Education Examples

Persuasive Essay About Smoking - Making a Powerful Argument with Examples

Are you about to write a persuasive essay on abortion but wondering how to begin?

Writing an effective persuasive essay on the topic of abortion can be a difficult task for many students. 

It is important to understand both sides of the issue and form an argument based on facts and logical reasoning. This requires research and understanding, which takes time and effort.

In this blog, we will provide you with some easy steps to craft a persuasive essay about abortion that is compelling and convincing. Moreover, we have included some example essays and interesting facts to read and get inspired by. 

So let's start!

• 1. How To Write a Persuasive Essay About Abortion?
• 2. Persuasive Essay About Abortion Examples
• 3. Examples of Argumentative Essay About Abortion
• 4. Abortion Persuasive Essay Topics
• 5. Facts About Abortion You Need to Know

How To Write a Persuasive Essay About Abortion?

Abortion is a controversial topic, with people having differing points of view and opinions on the matter. There are those who oppose abortion, while some people endorse pro-choice arguments. 

It is also an emotionally charged subject, so you need to be extra careful when crafting your persuasive essay .

Before you start writing your persuasive essay, you need to understand the following steps.

Step 1: Choose Your Position

The first step to writing a persuasive essay on abortion is to decide your position. Do you support the practice or are you against it? You need to make sure that you have a clear opinion before you begin writing. 

Once you have decided, research and find evidence that supports your position. This will help strengthen your argument. 

Check out the video below to get more insights into this topic:

Step 2: Choose Your Audience

The next step is to decide who your audience will be. Will you write for pro-life or pro-choice individuals? Or both? 

Knowing who you are writing for will guide your writing and help you include the most relevant facts and information.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Step 3: Define Your Argument

Now that you have chosen your position and audience, it is time to craft your argument. 

Start by defining what you believe and why, making sure to use evidence to support your claims. You also need to consider the opposing arguments and come up with counter arguments. This helps make your essay more balanced and convincing.

Step 4: Format Your Essay

Once you have the argument ready, it is time to craft your persuasive essay. Follow a standard format for the essay, with an introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. 

Make sure that each paragraph is organized and flows smoothly. Use clear and concise language, getting straight to the point.

Step 5: Proofread and Edit

The last step in writing your persuasive essay is to make sure that you proofread and edit it carefully. Look for spelling, grammar, punctuation, or factual errors and correct them. This will help make your essay more professional and convincing.

These are the steps you need to follow when writing a persuasive essay on abortion. It is a good idea to read some examples before you start so you can know how they should be written.

Continue reading to find helpful examples.

Persuasive Essay About Abortion Examples

To help you get started, here are some example persuasive essays on abortion that may be useful for your own paper.

Short Persuasive Essay About Abortion

Persuasive Essay About No To Abortion

What Is Abortion? - Essay Example

Persuasive Speech on Abortion

Legal Abortion Persuasive Essay

Persuasive Essay About Abortion in the Philippines

Persuasive Essay about legalizing abortion

You can also read m ore persuasive essay examples to imp rove your persuasive skills.

Examples of Argumentative Essay About Abortion

An argumentative essay is a type of essay that presents both sides of an argument. These essays rely heavily on logic and evidence.

Here are some examples of argumentative essay with introduction, body and conclusion that you can use as a reference in writing your own argumentative essay. 

Abortion Persuasive Essay Introduction

Argumentative Essay About Abortion Conclusion

Argumentative Essay About Abortion Pdf

Argumentative Essay About Abortion in the Philippines

Argumentative Essay About Abortion - Introduction

Abortion Persuasive Essay Topics

If you are looking for some topics to write your persuasive essay on abortion, here are some examples:

• Should abortion be legal in the United States?
• Is it ethical to perform abortions, considering its pros and cons?
• What should be done to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortions?
• Is there a connection between abortion and psychological trauma?
• What are the ethical implications of abortion on demand?
• How has the debate over abortion changed over time?
• Should there be legal restrictions on late-term abortions?
• Does gender play a role in how people view abortion rights?
• Is it possible to reduce poverty and unwanted pregnancies through better sex education?
• How is the anti-abortion point of view affected by religious beliefs and values? 

These are just some of the potential topics that you can use for your persuasive essay on abortion. Think carefully about the topic you want to write about and make sure it is something that interests you. 

Check out m ore persuasive essay topics that will help you explore other things that you can write about!

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Facts About Abortion You Need to Know

Here are some facts about abortion that will help you formulate better arguments.

• According to the Guttmacher Institute , 1 in 4 pregnancies end in abortion.
• The majority of abortions are performed in the first trimester.
• Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures, with less than a 0.5% risk of major complications.
• In the United States, 14 states have laws that restrict or ban most forms of abortion after 20 weeks gestation.
• Seven out of 198 nations allow elective abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
• In places where abortion is illegal, more women die during childbirth and due to complications resulting from pregnancy.
• A majority of pregnant women who opt for abortions do so for financial and social reasons.
• According to estimates, 56 million abortions occur annually.

In conclusion, these are some of the examples, steps, and topics that you can use to write a persuasive essay. Make sure to do your research thoroughly and back up your arguments with evidence. This will make your essay more professional and convincing. 

Need the services of a persuasive essay writing service ? We've got your back!

MyPerfectWords.com that provides help to students in the form of professionally written essays. Our persuasive essay writer can craft quality persuasive essays on any topic, including abortion. 

So, just ask our experts ' do my essay ' and get professional help.

Frequently Asked Questions

What should i talk about in an essay about abortion.

When writing an essay about abortion, it is important to cover all the aspects of the subject. This includes discussing both sides of the argument, providing facts and evidence to support your claims, and exploring potential solutions.

What is a good argument for abortion?

A good argument for abortion could be that it is a woman’s choice to choose whether or not to have an abortion. It is also important to consider the potential risks of carrying a pregnancy to term.

Write Essay Within 60 Seconds!

Caleb S. has been providing writing services for over five years and has a Masters degree from Oxford University. He is an expert in his craft and takes great pride in helping students achieve their academic goals. Caleb is a dedicated professional who always puts his clients first.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

• Your Health
• Treatments & Tests
• Health Inc.
• Public Health

Reproductive rights in America

What abortion politics has to do with new rights for pregnant workers.

Selena Simmons-Duffin

Employers are required to make accommodations for pregnant women and new moms like time off for doctor's appointments. Thomas Trutschel/Photothek via Getty Images hide caption

Employers are required to make accommodations for pregnant women and new moms like time off for doctor's appointments.

This week, attorneys general from 17 Republican-led states sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission over something they say is an "abortion accommodation mandate."

Here are four things to know about the latest battle in the war over abortion between Republican-led states and the Biden administration.

1. The law in question is about protections for pregnant workers.

First, a little background: In 2015, a survey found that nearly 1 in 4 women went back to work just two weeks after giving birth.

It took about ten years for a bill protecting pregnant workers to get through Congress, and in 2022, not long after Roe v. Wade was overturned, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act passed with bipartisan support. The law requires employers with at least 15 employees to accommodate workers who are pregnant with things like extra bathroom breaks, time off for prenatal appointments, a chair for sitting during a shift. It also says employers have to accommodate workers after they give birth.

Even though lawmakers from both parties think pregnancy protections are a good thing, abortion politics have overshadowed the news of those new rights. It all comes down to one line in the law and the word "abortion" in the regulation.

The law says employers should make "reasonable accommodations" for pregnant workers during and after "pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions." The new rule EEOC put out to implement the law includes abortion in a lengthy list of "related medical conditions," along with everything from ectopic pregnancy to anxiety to varicose veins.

2. Abortion entered the chat and about 100,000 people chimed in on the regulations.

Political and religious groups that oppose abortion rights took notice of the inclusion of "abortion" in the list of related medical conditions, as did the lead Republican co-sponsor of the law , Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. Some 54,000 people commented on the proposed rule objecting to the inclusion of abortion, according to the EEOC's analysis in the final rule, while 40,000 people commented in support of abortion's inclusion. (The agency noted that most of these were nearly identical "form comments" driven by advocacy groups).

In the end, "abortion" remained on the list. In its analysis, the agency explained that abortion's inclusion is consistent with longstanding interpretation of civil rights laws and courts' rulings. In the final rule, the EEOC says the law "does not require any employee to have – or not to have – an abortion, does not require taxpayers to pay for any abortions, and does not compel health care providers to provide any abortions." The rule also notes that unpaid time off for appointments is the most likely accommodation that would be sought by workers having abortions.

3. The lawsuit + the politics of the lawsuit

Within days of the rule being published in the Federal Register , a coalition of 17 Republican-led states filed suit. "The implications of mandating abortion accommodations are immense: covered employers would be required to support and devote resources, including by providing extra leave time, to assist employees' decision to terminate fetal life," the lawsuit reads .

The lawsuit was filed on Thursday in federal court in Eastern Arkansas. The plaintiffs ask the court to put a hold on the effective date of the final rule pending judicial review, and to temporarily block the enforcement of – and ultimately vacate – the rule's "abortion-accommodation mandate."

Arkansas and Tennessee are the two states leading the lawsuit. In a statement , Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin said: "This is yet another attempt by the Biden administration to force through administrative fiat what it cannot get passed through Congress."

Griffin said the rule is a "radical interpretation" of the new pregnancy protection law that would leave employers subject to federal lawsuits if they don't give employees time off for abortions, even if abortions are illegal in those states. "The PWFA was meant to protect pregnancies, not end them," he said.

Women's advocates see the politics of the lawsuit as well. "It's no coincidence that this organized, partisan effort is occurring in states that have some of the highest maternal mortality rates in the country," Jocelyn Frye of the National Partnership for Women & Families wrote in a statement . "Any attempt to dismantle these protections will have serious consequences for women's health, working families, and the ability for women to thrive in the workplace."

Greer Donley is a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh who submitted a comment on the proposed regulation defending the inclusion of abortion. She points out that this is the latest in a string of legal challenges from anti-abortion groups fighting the Biden administration's efforts to protect abortion using federal agencies.

"You can really see this in a suite of [abortion] lawsuits – including the two that were heard in the Supreme Court this term, one involving the FDA's regulation of mifepristone and one involving the Biden administration's interpretation of EMTALA ," she observes, and guesses a legal challenge will also come in response to the newly announced privacy protections for patients who've had abortions. "You have a Supreme Court that is overwhelmingly anti-abortion and overwhelmingly anti-administrative state – those two things in tandem are not a good thing for the Biden administration."

4. In the meantime, pregnant workers have new rights.

At the moment, until a judge says otherwise, the new protections for pregnant workers are already in effect. The EEOC has a guide for pregnant workers about their new rights under the law and how to file charges against their employers. It's also holding trainings for human resource professionals on how to comply with the law.

Complaints have already started to roll in. In a statement to NPR, EEOC spokesperson Victor Chen wrote that in the first three months that the law was in effect, the agency received nearly 200 charges alleging a violation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which works out to nearly two a day.

• pregnancy discrimination
• Abortion rights

• International

Supreme Court hears case about emergency abortion care

By CNN's Tierney Sneed, John Fritze, Hannah Rabinowitz, Jen Christensen and Holmes Lybrand

Key takeaways from today's Supreme Court oral arguments over emergency abortions

From CNN's Tierney Sneed and John Fritze

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday on whether Idaho’s abortion ban can be enforced in medical emergencies, putting a spotlight on what has been one of the most politically explosive flashpoints in the aftermath of Roe v. Wade’s demise. 

Here are key takeaways from today's high-stakes hearing :

US solicitor general tailors her appeal to an abortion-hostile court as "narrow" circumstances of medical emergencies: US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said that there was a real conflict between Idaho’s law and the federal law, known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), but she painted it as a narrow one. She stressed that, in this case, the administration is not trying to interfere with Idaho’s overall ability to criminalize abortions outside of certain medical emergencies.

Idaho and its defenders argue that the Biden administration is trying to circumvent the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that let states prohibit abortion, and to rebut that argument, Prelogar described Idaho has an outlier among states that have banned the procedure.

Prelogar’s argument was met with deep skepticism from several of the court’s conservative justices, but others – including Chief Justice John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett– asked probing questions of both sides. The court’s liberal wing, meanwhile, all signaled they would coalesce around the Biden administration.

Idaho attorney struggles with questions from female justices about serious pregnancy complications: Idaho’s attorney Joshua Turner was subjected to a brutal and extended line of questioning from the female justices of the court exploring how the state’s abortion ban plays out in medical emergencies – particularly in dire situations where a woman’s health is at risk but her life is not yet in danger.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked Turner point blank: “What you are saying is that there is no federal law on the book that prohibits any state from saying, even if a woman will die, you can’t perform an abortion?”

Justice Elena Kagan offered a hypothetical in which a woman was about to lose her reproductive organs due to a pregnancy complication. As Turner danced around the “difficult” and “tough” situation her question as posing, she pushed harder: “That would be a good response if federal law did not take a position on what you characterize as a ‘tough question.’”

Keep reading takeaways from the arguments.

Supreme Court justices appear divided on abortion case, with Roberts and Barrett emerging as key votes 

From CNN's Tierney Sneed

In a Supreme Court  hearing on the Biden administration’s challenge to aspects of Idaho’s strict abortion ban , US Solicitor General  Elizabeth Prelogar  sought to appeal to conservative justices who just two years ago ruled that states should have the ability to prohibit the procedure.

The dispute, stemming from the Justice Department’s marquee response to the high court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade in 2022, turns on whether federal mandates for hospital emergency room care override abortion bans that do not exempt situations where a woman’s health is in danger but her life is not yet threatened.

To prevail, the Biden administration will need the votes of two members of the court’s conservative bloc, and with Justice Brett Kavanaugh signaling sympathies toward Idaho, the case will likely come down to the votes of Chief Justice John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett. The two justices had tough questions for both sides of the case.

The court’s far-right wing, perhaps in an attempt to keep those two justices on their side, framed the case as a federal overreach into state power. The court’s liberals, meanwhile, focused on the grisly details of medical emergencies faced by pregnant woman that were not covered by the limited life-of-the-woman exemption in Idaho’s ban.

Having access to safe abortion is critical for a safe health care system, doctor from rural Idaho says

From CNN's Maureen Chowdhury

Dr. Caitlin Gustafson, a family medicine physician from rural Idaho, said having access to safe abortions should be a standard of care in order to have a safe health care system.

Speaking to CNN right outside of the Supreme Court, Gustafson said that she has seen Idaho's health care system "fall apart" since the abortion ban went into effect.

"We have lost a multitude of providers, particularly my OB-GYN colleagues who cannot continue to have themselves in the position of trying to make these decisions in emergencies, where a patient's heath and life threatened," she said, noting that if they make the wrong decision at the wrong moment, they may go to jail or lose their license.

Gustafson said that believes the Supreme Court's decision, based on today's arguments regarding whether Idaho's abortion ban can be enforced in medical emergencies , puts safe emergency health care across the board is at risk.

"This isn't just about abortion, this is about a protection of — a life saving protection we've had in place that keeps any person, including our pregnant patients who come to the emergency room safe," she said.

The federal law is what doctors across the country has "grown up under and it's what keeps everyone safe" she said. Gustafson also noted that she's seen a distinct change in the health care system in Idaho since doctors in the state lost this protection and says it is "untenable."

US solicitor general compares Idaho abortion law to hypothetical ban on epinephrine

From CNN's Holmes Lybrand

US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued today that Idaho’s abortion law is akin to a ban on epinephrine, which treats severe allergic reactions.

Prelogar noted federal law mandates that if a person has an emergency medical condition and goes to an emergency room, “they have to stabilize you."

“Congress did not provide a reticulated list of all possible emergency medical conditions and all possible treatments,” she said. “But it was very clear that Congress set a baseline national standard of care to ensure that no matter where you live in this country you can’t be declined service.”

Of Idaho’s abortion law, Prelogar said: “It would be no different if the state had come out and decided to ban epinephrine."

“I don’t see any way to try to draw lines around to exclude pregnancy complications,” she added.

Supreme Court arguments on historic abortion case have concluded

From CNN's John Fritze

Supreme Court arguments in the historic abortion case have concluded. 

Now the justices will begin drafting an opinion – or several. That process usually takes a few months. In this case, the court is expected to hand down its ruling by the end of June.

US solicitor general and Alito go head-to-head

From CNN's Hannah Rabinowitz

In a tense exchange over how federal protections extend to a fetus, US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued that women “deserve” medical treatment whenever it is needed.

Prelogar and Conservative Justice Samuel Alito went head-to-head as part of a line of questioning from the justice over whether, in enacting the federal law EMTALA, lawmakers were aiming to give protections to an “unborn child" — a term that is included in multiple provisions of the law.

Prelogar said the law states there is a duty for doctors to act when a pregnant person is “suffering some kind of emergency and her own health isn’t at risk, but the fetus might die,” like in the case of a prolapse of the umbilical cord into the cervix.

“But to suggest that in doing so," Prelogar said, "Congress suggested that the woman herself isn’t an individual, that she doesn’t deserve stabilization — I think that that is an erroneous reading of this."

Alito snapped back: “Nobody’s suggesting that a woman is not an individual and she doesn’t deserve stabilization.”

US solicitor general cites 1800s SCOTUS decision in abortion arguments

US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued that the federal government has an interest to “protect its sovereign interest,” noting that “Idaho has directly interfered with the ability of hospitals to accept” federal funds through its abortion law.

Prelogar said several cases address the issue of proprietary interest, citing a case from the late 1800s in which the US Supreme Court unanimously upheld the federal government’s injunction to stop a labor strike related to US railroads.

Prelogar cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in the case, known as In re Debs, during arguments against Idaho’s abortion law.

Justice Neil Gorsuch reacted: “Debs? You really want to rely on Debs, general? I mean that wasn’t exactly our brightest moment."

“I do think though that it reflects the history and tradition of this nation in recognizing that it’s entirely appropriate for the United States to seek to protect its interests in this manner,” Prelogar said.

Alito brings up the "unborn child" debate

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito asked US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar to explain why the federal law in question, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), uses the term “unborn child.”

“It’s not an odd phrase when you look at what Congress was doing,” at the time Prelogar said. The law was amended to add the term in 1989.

“There were well publicized cases where women were experiencing conditions their own health and life were not in danger, but the fetus was engraved distress and hospitals weren’t treating them," Prelogar said.

The term is referenced multiple times in law, including in the definition of a medical emergency scenario where the health of an unborn child is in serious jeopardy, where restricting the transfer of a patient in labor would put the safety of the unborn child at risk. 

The Charlotte Lozier Institute, an anti-abortion think tank, said in a friend-of-the-court brief that that EMTALA “expressly protects the lives of unborn children” and that it requires hospitals to “to follow the two-patient paradigm to protect both the mother and her unborn child.”   

“The United States’ attempt to diminish the ‘unborn child’s’ life as secondary—one that must be protected only if her mother’s health is not threatened but loses all value if her mother’s health is in jeopardy—is atextual,” the brief said. “Congress expected hospitals and physicians to preserve both lives wherever possible.”  

After Idaho’s abortion ban, more patients have been transferred out of state for emergency abortion care

From CNN Health's Meg Tirrell, Carma Hassan and Jamie Gumbrecht

If a pregnant woman in Idaho comes to an emergency room facing a grave threat to health but isn’t facing death, doctors have to delay her care until she deteriorates “or they’re airlifting her out of the state so she can get the emergency care that she needs,” US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said in her argument.

“One hospital system in Idaho says that right now, it's having to transfer pregnant women in medical crisis out of the state about once every other week,” she said.

There has been an uptick in the number of patients transferred for life-saving abortions after Idaho  banned the procedure , according to Dr. Jim Souza, the chief physician executive for Boise-based St. Luke’s Health System.

St. Luke's, Idaho's largest hospital system, wrote in a  friend-of-the-court brief  that the legal uncertainty created by the state's abortion ban means patients with emergency pregnancy complications are more likely to be transferred out of state for care unless they're at "imminent risk of death."

Souza said that in 2023, during an injunction on enforcement of the law as it pertained to the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), only one patient in the emergency department was recommended to be transferred out of the state.

“In the short period of time, it’s been just a few months now that Idaho’s law has been in effect, six patients with medical emergencies have already been transferred out of state for termination,” Souza said in a call with reporters last week. “If we annualize that, we can anticipate up to 20 patients needing out-of-state care this year alone.”

Dr. Julie Lyons, a family medicine physician with St. Luke’s Health System, told CNN in February that she counsels patients on their first prenatal visit to "buy life-flight insurance," in case they face a "rare situation that a complication does happen."

Some doctors have also left Idaho as a result of the law, Souza said, creating a “destabilizing effect” on the hospital system.

Please enable JavaScript for a better experience.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Pro-Choice Does Not Mean Pro-Abortion: An Argument for Abortion Rights Featuring the Rev. Carlton Veazey

Since the Supreme Court’s historic 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade , the issue of a woman’s right to an abortion has fostered one of the most contentious moral and political debates in America. Opponents of abortion rights argue that life begins at conception – making abortion tantamount to homicide. Abortion rights advocates, in contrast, maintain that women have a right to decide what happens to their bodies – sometimes without any restrictions.

To explore the case for abortion rights, the Pew Forum turns to the Rev. Carlton W. Veazey, who for more than a decade has been president of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. Based in Washington, D.C., the coalition advocates for reproductive choice and religious freedom on behalf of about 40 religious groups and organizations. Prior to joining the coalition, Veazey spent 33 years as a pastor at Zion Baptist Church in Washington, D.C.

A counterargument explaining the case against abortion rights is made by the Rev. J. Daniel Mindling, professor of moral theology at Mount St. Mary’s Seminary.

Featuring: The Rev. Carlton W. Veazey, President, Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice

Interviewer: David Masci, Senior Research Fellow, Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

Question & Answer

Can you explain how your Christian faith informs your views in support of abortion rights?

I grew up in a Christian home. My father was a Baptist minister for many years in Memphis, Tenn. One of the things that he instilled in me – I used to hear it so much – was free will, free will, free will. It was ingrained in me that you have the ability to make choices. You have the ability to decide what you want to do. You are responsible for your decisions, but God has given you that responsibility, that option to make decisions.

I had firsthand experience of seeing black women and poor women being disproportionately impacted by the fact that they had no choices about an unintended pregnancy, even if it would damage their health or cause great hardship in their family. And I remember some of them being maimed in back-alley abortions; some of them died. There was no legal choice before Roe v. Wade .

But in this day and time, we have a clearer understanding that men and women are moral agents and equipped to make decisions about even the most difficult and complex matters. We must ensure a woman can determine when and whether to have children according to her own conscience and religious beliefs and without governmental interference or coercion. We must also ensure that women have the resources to have a healthy, safe pregnancy, if that is their decision, and that women and families have the resources to raise a child with security.

The right to choose has changed and expanded over the years since Roe v. Wade . We now speak of reproductive justice – and that includes comprehensive sex education, family planning and contraception, adequate medical care, a safe environment, the ability to continue a pregnancy and the resources that make that choice possible. That is my moral framework.

You talk about free will, and as a Christian you believe in free will. But you also said that God gave us free will and gave us the opportunity to make right and wrong choices. Why do you believe that abortion can, at least in some instances, be the right choice?

Dan Maguire, a former Jesuit priest and professor of moral theology and ethics at Marquette University, says that to have a child can be a sacred choice, but to not have a child can also be a sacred choice.

And these choices revolve around circumstances and issues – like whether a person is old enough to care for a child or whether a woman already has more children than she can care for. Also, remember that medical circumstances are the reason many women have an abortion – for example, if they are having chemotherapy for cancer or have a life-threatening chronic illness – and most later-term abortions occur because of fetal abnormalities that will result in stillbirth or the death of the child. These are difficult decisions; they’re moral decisions, sometimes requiring a woman to decide if she will risk her life for a pregnancy.

Abortion is a very serious decision and each decision depends on circumstances. That’s why I tell people: I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice. And that’s an important distinction.

You’ve talked about the right of a woman to make a choice. Does the fetus have any rights?

First, let me say that the religious, pro-choice position is based on respect for human life, including potential life and existing life.

But I do not believe that life as we know it starts at conception. I am troubled by the implications of a fetus having legal rights because that could pit the fetus against the woman carrying the fetus; for example, if the woman needed a medical procedure, the law could require the fetus to be considered separately and equally.

From a religious perspective, it’s more important to consider the moral issues involved in making a decision about abortion. Also, it’s important to remember that religious traditions have very different ideas about the status of the fetus. Roman Catholic doctrine regards a fertilized egg as a human being. Judaism holds that life begins with the first breath.

What about at the very end of a woman’s pregnancy? Does a fetus acquire rights after the point of viability, when it can survive outside the womb? Or let me ask it another way: Assuming a woman is healthy and her fetus is healthy, should the woman be able to terminate her pregnancy until the end of her pregnancy?

There’s an assumption that a woman would end a viable pregnancy carelessly or without a reason. The facts don’t bear this out. Most abortions are performed in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Late abortions are virtually always performed for the most serious medical and health reasons, including saving the woman’s life.

But what if such a case came before you? If you were that woman’s pastor, what would you say?

I would talk to her in a helpful, positive, respectful way and help her discuss what was troubling her. I would suggest alternatives such as adoption.

Let me shift gears a little bit. Many Americans have said they favor a compromise, or reaching a middle-ground policy, on abortion. Do you sympathize with this desire and do you think that both sides should compromise to end this rancorous debate?

I have been to more middle-ground and common-ground meetings than I can remember and I’ve never been to one where we walked out with any decision.

That being said, I think that we all should agree that abortion should be rare. How do we do that? We do that by providing comprehensive sex education in schools and in religious congregations and by ensuring that there is accurate information about contraception and that contraception is available. Unfortunately, the U.S. Congress has not been willing to pass a bill to fund comprehensive sex education, but they are willing to put a lot of money into failed and harmful abstinence-only programs that often rely on scare tactics and inaccurate information.

Former Surgeon General David Satcher has shown that abstinence-only programs do not work and that we should provide young people with the information to protect themselves. Education that stresses abstinence and provides accurate information about contraception will reduce the abortion rate. That is the ground that I stand on. I would say that here is a way we can work together to reduce the need for abortions.

Abortion has become central to what many people call the “culture wars.” Some consider it to be the most contentious moral issue in America today. Why do many Catholics, evangelical Christians and other people of faith disagree with you?

I was raised to respect differing views so the rigid views against abortion are hard for me to understand. I will often tell someone on the other side, “I respect you. I may disagree with your theological perspective, but I respect your views. But I think it’s totally arrogant for you to tell me that I need to believe what you believe.” It’s not that I think we should not try to win each other over. But we have to respect people’s different religious beliefs.

But what about people who believe that life begins at conception and that terminating a pregnancy is murder? For them, it may not just be about respecting or tolerating each other’s viewpoints; they believe this is an issue of life or death. What do you say to people who make that kind of argument?

I would say that they have a right to their beliefs, as do I. I would try to explain that my views are grounded in my religion, as are theirs. I believe that we must ensure that women are treated with dignity and respect and that women are able to follow the dictates of their conscience – and that includes their reproductive decisions. Ultimately, it is the government’s responsibility to ensure that women have the ability to make decisions of conscience and have access to reproductive health services.

Some in the anti-abortion camp contend that the existence of legalized abortion is a sign of the self-centeredness and selfishness of our age. Is there any validity to this view?

Although abortion is a very difficult decision, it can be the most responsible decision a person can make when faced with an unintended pregnancy or a pregnancy that will have serious health consequences.

Depending on the circumstances, it might be selfish to bring a child into the world. You know, a lot of people say, “You must bring this child into the world.” They are 100 percent supportive while the child is in the womb. As soon as the child is born, they abort the child in other ways. They abort a child through lack of health care, lack of education, lack of housing, and through poverty, which can drive a child into drugs or the criminal justice system.

So is it selfish to bring children into the world and not care for them? I think the other side can be very selfish by neglecting the children we have already. For all practical purposes, children whom we are neglecting are being aborted.

This transcript has been edited for clarity, spelling and grammar.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Religion & Abortion
• Religion & Social Values

What the data says about abortion in the U.S.

Support for legal abortion is widespread in many countries, especially in europe, nearly a year after roe’s demise, americans’ views of abortion access increasingly vary by where they live, by more than two-to-one, americans say medication abortion should be legal in their state, most latinos say democrats care about them and work hard for their vote, far fewer say so of gop, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy

The climate crisis is a sexual health and reproductive rights emergency

As global temperatures rise, so do the challenges for abortion access and women's health services, by anu kumar.

In the wake of Earth Day, West Africa is facing a historic and deadly heatwave , last month was the tenth hottest month in a row in the U.S., and Americans and people across the globe are already bracing for what scientists are predicting will be yet another record-breaking summer with more extreme heat and weather events in store.

Those of us paying attention know it to be true: the climate crisis is here . Climate change is perhaps the defining crisis of our time and our rapidly changing climate will undoubtedly affect every aspect of human life – including people’s sexual and reproductive health.

Women and girls disproportionately bear the brunt of climate-related events and environmental stress – women comprise 20 million of the 26 million people estimated to have been displaced already by climate change. As the climate crisis ravages our world, many have ignored the detrimental impact it has on women’s lives, their access to health care and their agency to create the families and futures of their choosing. But we can no longer ignore this reality. 

Our global community is experiencing a swift rise in disastrous weather events from droughts and flooding to extreme heat and freak storms. As I wrote when Hurricane Harvey struck Texas several years ago, during these ever-more-frequent emergencies, sexual and reproductive health services are often “invisible” when compared with food and emergency medicine in humanitarian relief efforts and crisis settings. But reproductive health services such as contraception and abortion are also critical and time-sensitive.

We simply cannot talk about the dangers and harms of climate change without including the impact on reproductive health. It’s past time to recognize that climate justice is a reproductive justice issue . 

Sexual and reproductive health services are often “invisible” when compared with food and emergency medicine in humanitarian relief efforts and crisis settings.

Let’s take one example: access to clean water. In Kenya, and in many places across the globe, access to clean water is increasingly in jeopardy due to ongoing cycles of drought and flooding brought on by climate change. Without access to clean water, women cannot safely give birth. They cannot receive basic reproductive care. Health care providers in Kenya have reported turning away women seeking reliable long-term contraception like implants and IUDs, as well as women actively in labor, because they cannot sanitize the health facility.

Additionally, sea level rise in Bangladesh has turned many freshwater sources into salt water, forcing women in these communities to bathe, drink and fish in non-fresh water, which has been linked to hypertension, preeclampsia and a rise in miscarriage and dangerous gynecological infections.

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes .

As these droughts, floods and other climate emergencies force people from their homes and create climate refugees , we know women face elevated risk of gender-based violence, forced prostitution, forced marriage and unwanted pregnancy. Women are not only more likely than men to be displaced by climate change, they are disproportionately negatively impacted by displacement.

Furthermore, what is deeply troubling is in the wake of climate emergencies, even humanitarian aid is rife with a minefield of harms for women and girls. In Mozambique , women report being exploited by government officials in charge of food aid distribution after climate disasters, offering them extra food in exchange for sexual favors. In times of emergency, the last worry on a mother’s mind should be wondering if she or her children will be safe from sexual violence if they seek shelter in government-provided housing.

So many women in the world are enduring these horrors as a result of the climate crisis. It is heartbreaking, terrifying and unacceptable.

Yet, research from Ipas, the non-profit reproductive justice organization where I am president, indicates that women in Bangladesh have faced increased sexual harassment and assault in community cyclone centers. Researchers on my team have also spoken with countless women and girls who are afraid to use the bathroom in humanitarian aid-provided shelters because the facilities are shared by men and often lack door locks and lighting, causing them to painfully hold their urine for fear of being sexually assaulted.

So many women in the world are enduring these horrors as a result of the climate crisis. It is heartbreaking, terrifying and unacceptable – we cannot allow them to go unaddressed or become worse.

We are already feeling the fallout of the climate crisis – it's no longer a question of whether or not it exists, but rather how will we deal with the already catastrophic transformation of our world that climate change will create. As we puzzle through that enormous problem, we must prioritize women and girls’ sexual and reproductive health.

We need your help to stay independent

So what does that look like? At minimum, it means integrating abortion access and sexual and reproductive health and rights into climate justice efforts at the local, regional and global levels, including in the wake of disasters. It means prioritizing the views of women in climate solutions.   And it means empowering women in community decision-making.

But we must think more boldly. Climate change calls on us to radically re-imagine health service delivery. Brick and mortar clinics will not serve us if they are washed away or are without electricity and staff. This is a call for public health professionals to move beyond “resilience” to re-imagination. We must radically re-imagine the health system, and we are very far behind in doing so. In the meantime, people suffer.

While our scientists, researchers, policymakers and experts work to mitigate climate change, we must ensure we are guided by a commitment to creating a world in which women and girls have bodily autonomy, are resilient in the face of climate change, and have the power to determine their own futures.

about climate change and reproductive rights

• Are humans a cancer on the planet? A physician argues that civilization is truly carcinogenic
• Plot twister: A new test gauges Hollywood's depictions of global warming. Will it make a difference?
• Mount Everest was the riskiest place I had practiced medicine until I became an OB/GYN in the South

President and CEO of Ipas, an international reproductive health and rights organization that focuses on access to contraception and abortion.

Related Topics ------------------------------------------

Related articles.

• Newsletters
• Account Activating this button will toggle the display of additional content Account Sign out

The Lawyer Defending Idaho’s Abortion Ban Irritated the One Justice He Needed on His Side

Justice Amy Coney Barrett famously provided the crucial fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022. So if you are arguing in favor of an abortion ban, you probably don’t want to alienate Barrett—by, say, condescendingly dismissing her concerns when she points out that your legal theory doesn’t make any sense. Yet that is what Joshua Turner did on Wednesday while defending Idaho’s draconian abortion restrictions, and much to Barrett’s evident irritation. Turner—who represented the Idaho solicitor general’s office in the second major abortion case to come before the high court after it promised us in its Dobbs opinion that the court was out of the abortion business in 2022—might just have lost his case by repeatedly mansplaining his self-contradictory position to Barrett and the other three women justices. In his toneless, dispassionate telling, his entirely incomprehensible position was just too complex for them to understand. And so he just kept repeating it, over and over. These justices, including Barrett, sounded increasingly fed up with his chin-stroking dissembling on an issue that’s literally life-or-death for pregnant women in red states. If the court’s male members noticed Turner’s dismissive attitude toward their colleagues, they didn’t care. The gender divide on the court has never been so revealing.

Perhaps because Dobbs was a threat to unknown future women, whereas real women are now being left to hemorrhage, lose the functioning of their reproductive organs, or be popped onto helicopters to receive out-of-state stabilizing care, none of the life-and-death harms being experienced in red states around the country feel very theoretical to anyone who has thought about pregnancy in a serious way. Yet, for male justices more worried about harms to the spending clause , nothing about potentially lethal pregnancies warranted even a moment’s pause.

Wednesday’s case, Moyle v. United States , revolves around a clash between Idaho law and a 1986 federal statute called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (or EMTALA). Idaho’s abortion ban has no exception for the health of the patient; rather, it criminalizes abortion unless it’s “necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman.” EMTALA, meanwhile, requires virtually all hospitals to provide stabilizing treatment for any condition that “could reasonably be expected” to put the patient’s health “in serious jeopardy,” as well as any condition that could seriously impair bodily functions or organs.

The Biden administration argues there’s a conflict between Idaho law and EMTALA: Where Idaho allows termination only when the patient is at the brink of death, EMTALA mandates intervention earlier, to stabilize the patient before she is literally dying, including situations in which she is facing organ damage, infertility, or other serious harms. So the administration sued the state, and a federal judge issued an injunction compelling Idaho to allow emergency abortions to preserve a patient’s “health.” Now SCOTUS must decide whether the federal statute limits the ability of states like Idaho to criminalize abortions that are health-sparing but not necessarily lifesaving. And that means slipping into their white coats and stethoscopes and explaining to America’s emergency physicians how to do their jobs without risking two to five years in prison and a loss of licensure for making poor guesses about what stabilizing care involves.

Turner, representing Idaho on Wednesday, made a hodgepodge of his state’s arguments that are frankly difficult to harmonize. He seemed to make three central claims: First, that EMTALA does not mandate any particular standard of care (despite prescribing one pretty clearly); second, that even if it did, Idaho’s law would comport with that standard (even though it criminalizes abortion as stabilizing treatment); and third, that abortion is never a standard of care under Idaho law. Except for when it is, which is when it’s necessary to save a patient’s life. Which is a narrower standard than what EMTALA mandates. Which is irrelevant, because, according to Turner, EMTALA doesn’t mandate anything at all. But also, that there is a difference between the care demanded by EMTALA and Idaho, but also that there is no difference, but also that physicians shouldn’t sweat this because beneficent prosecutors probably won’t jail them on the basis of a close call.  

Confused? So were the justices. Progressive Justices Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Sonia Sotomayor all took turns trying to draw out a single scrap of consistent logic from Turner’s rhetorical detritus. Kagan pressed him to admit that EMTALA sets forth an “objective standard” of care—the stabilization of a patient—that sometimes includes abortion. He refused. She sounded aghast. Does the statute, she asked, at least require states to permit abortions for ectopic pregnancies, which will cause death if not terminated? No, Turner responded, adding: “That understanding is a humble one with respect to the federalism rule of states.” To which Kagan in turn responded: “It may be too humble for women’s health.”

Jackson questioned Turner’s insistence that EMTALA does not require anything that Idaho prohibits, rebuking his strange declaration that the state’s trigger ban simply defers to the “medical judgment” of state legislatures rather than doctors. And Sotomayor pummeled Turner with real stories, all ripped from the headlines, of women denied abortions and then forced to bleed out in agony, then asked him whether these women would be allowed to terminate under Idaho law. When Turner refused to give a yes-or-no answer, Barrett finally stepped in. “I’m kind of shocked, actually,” she told Turner, “because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered. And you’re now saying they’re not?” Turner responded that he wasn’t, to which Barrett retorted: “Well, you’re hedging. I mean, Justice Sotomayor is asking you, ‘Would this be covered or not,’ and it was my understanding that the legislature’s witnesses said that these would be covered.” Turner told her, in short, not quite —the witnesses said that, in “exercising their medical judgment, they could in good faith determine that lifesaving care was necessary.” Barrett sounded irritated. “But some doctors might reach a contrary conclusion, I think is what Justice Sotomayor is asking you,” she told him. “If they reached the conclusion that the legislature’s doctors did, would they be prosecuted under Idaho law?”

Turner said no, but Barrett wasn’t convinced. “What if the prosecutor thought differently?” she went on. “What if the prosecutor thought, well, I don’t think any good-faith doctor could draw that conclusion, I’m going to put on my expert?” Remarkably, Turner told her that’s “the nature of prosecutorial discretion”—meaning prosecutors might well bring charges anyway. At that point, doctors would have to defend their decision in court while facing a two-to-five- year prison sentence. (And ER doctors also face lawsuits if they defer lifesaving care.) So in Idaho you can pretty much just decide how to end your career, while spinning the wheel until someone sues you. No wonder physicians are bolting from the state.

Barrett was, to put it mildly, not satisfied. Later, when Turner tried to blame the Department of Justice for launching this case, she again put him in his place. “Well, hold on a second,” she said. “You’re here because there’s an injunction precluding you from enforcing your law. And if your law can fully operate because EMTALA doesn’t curb Idaho’s authority to enforce its law …” But she couldn’t finish her thought, because Turner interrupted her. It was one of many interruptions she would face from the Idaho attorney. And as the morning went on, she was less and less indulgent of his let-me-explain-this-like-you’re-a-toddler style of argument. When Turner accused the solicitor general of taking an overly aggressive litigation posture, Barrett declined to engage, instead sharply informing him: “OK, well, I would like to hear the solicitor general’s response to that,” and moving on. When she called out one of his silliest claims—that the Justice Department demanded emergency abortions to treat a “mental health condition”—Barrett sounded fed up. Turner hemmed and hawed, butchering the statute so badly that she had to step in to remind him of what it actually said.

When Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar had her turn at the lectern, she faced a barrage of questions from Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch about whether Congress had run afoul of the spending clause when it passed EMTALA, an issue that was not briefed and should not be in the case. Samuel Alito, who brought all of his dictionary-wielding and woman-erasing skills from his star turn in Dobbs to bear, devoted his time to defending the “unborn child” who—in his view—was the real goal of EMTALA’s drafters, laying the groundwork for fetal personhood arguments that were too radioactive even for Turner to take on. Alito hectored Prelogar about her grasp of preemption, her reading of text, and her understanding of the term “unborn child,” casting her as some drunk lunatic who had staggered into court without any comprehension of the law.

Throughout the day doctors were referenced as “he” whereas every nurse was a “she.” Women were, as Alito conceded, “individuals,” but man, oh man, are they ever whiny and demanding. Alito also breathlessly cited Ronald Reagan as the deity who signed EMTALA and would never have wanted it to undermine the precious rights of “unborn children.” And a little “temporary” organ damage, he mused, might not be so bad if suffered for the benefit of a fetus. The task fell to Kagan to remind everyone that in the few months that Idaho has enforced its near-total ban, six women have already been airlifted to other states to receive emergency abortions that are criminal under Idaho law. Real women, flown out in great pain and at great expense, to get treatment that is objectively recognized as the standard of care.

It’s not clear where this case will land: Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked a handful of breezy questions but didn’t tip their hands. It’s odd, though, that Wednesday’s arguments didn’t fully break through the news cycle (as tomorrow’s in the Donald Trump immunity case surely will). As Turner conceded, none of this madness will stop at Idaho; at least five other states, including Texas, have nearly identical bans. But for anyone who listened to these arguments, the symmetry was striking: Turner could spew whatever nonsense he wanted, ignoring serious questions from female interlocutors or evading them because they were invisible to him—just as the pregnant women who will get sicker and lose blood and be turned away at hospitals are invisible to the state he represents.

Advertisement

5 Takeaways From the Supreme Court Arguments on Idaho’s Abortion Ban

The court’s ruling could extend to at least half a dozen other states that have similarly restrictive bans, and the implications of the case could stretch beyond abortion.

• Share full article

By Pam Belluck

• April 24, 2024

The abortion case before the Supreme Court on Wednesday featured vigorous questioning and comments, particularly by the three liberal justices. At issue is whether Idaho’s near-total ban on abortion is so strict that it violates a federal law requiring emergency care for any patient, including providing abortions for pregnant women in dire situations.

A ruling could reverberate beyond Idaho, to at least half a dozen other states that have similarly restrictive bans.

The implications of the case could also extend beyond abortion, including whether states can legally restrict other types of emergency medical care and whether the federal law opens the door for claims of fetal personhood.

Here are some takeaways:

The case centers on whether Idaho’s abortion ban violates federal law.

Idaho’s ban allows abortion to save the life of a pregnant woman, but not to prevent her health from deteriorating. The federal government says it therefore violates the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, which was enacted nearly 40 years ago.

EMTALA says that when a patient goes to an emergency room with an urgent medical issue, hospitals must either provide treatment to stabilize the patient or transfer the patient to a medical facility that can, regardless of the patient’s ability to pay. It says that if a state law conflicts with the federal law, the federal law takes precedence.

A lawyer representing Idaho, Joshua Turner, told the Supreme Court that the state does not believe its abortion ban conflicts with the federal law. He said the ban allows emergency departments to provide abortions if a pregnant woman has a medical problem that is likely to lead to her death, not just if she is facing imminent death.

The three liberal justices strongly objected to Mr. Turner’s interpretation and pointed out situations in which women in critical situations would be denied abortions under Idaho’s ban. When Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked if the ban would prevent abortion in a situation where a woman would otherwise lose an organ or have serious medical complications, Mr. Turner acknowledged that it would. “Yes, Idaho law does say that abortions in that case aren’t allowed,” he said.

The real-world consequences of Idaho’s ban for abortion and other medical care were apparent.

Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar, representing the federal government, said Idaho’s abortion ban, which was allowed to take effect this year, had significant consequences for pregnant women and emergency room doctors.

“Today, doctors in Idaho and the women in Idaho are in an impossible position,” she said. “If a woman comes to an emergency room facing a grave threat to her health, but she isn’t yet facing death, doctors either have to delay treatment and allow her condition to materially deteriorate or they’re airlifting her out of the state so she can get the emergency care that she needs.”

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., one of the most conservative justices, asserted that the federal government and the liberal justices were giving hypothetical examples. But Justice Elena Kagan, a liberal, noted that the hospital with the most advanced emergency room services in Idaho had needed to transfer six women to other states for emergency abortions so far this year.

There was also discussion about potential consequences for other types of medical care if Idaho’s ban was allowed to stand. Justice Sotomayor said that would allow states to pass laws saying “don’t treat diabetics with insulin, treat them only with pills,” contradicting the best medical judgment of a doctor who “looks at a juvenile diabetic and says, ‘Without insulin, they’re going to get seriously ill.’”

Conservative justices raised questions about fetal rights.

Justice Alito, in particular, focused on the fact that EMTALA includes several mentions of the phrase “unborn child.”

“Doesn’t that tell us something?” he asked. He suggested that it meant that “the hospital must try to eliminate any immediate threat to the child,” and that “performing an abortion is antithetical to that duty.”

That was an argument that supports efforts by abortion opponents to establish “fetal personhood” rights and declare that life begins at conception. Idaho’s lawyer, Mr. Turner, said on Wednesday that “there are two patients to consider” when pregnant women seek emergency room care.

The federal government has pointed out that three of the four mentions of “unborn child” in EMTALA refer only to when a woman in labor might be transferred to another hospital.

Ms. Prelogar described the intent of the fourth reference to “unborn child,” which was added to the law later. She said it referred to situations in which a pregnant woman goes to an emergency room and her pregnancy is in danger but her own health is not currently at risk. In that case, the law would require hospitals to do what they could to save the pregnancy. That would not be a situation where an abortion would be provided, she said.

Ms. Prelogar also emphasized that usually in the kinds of pregnancy emergencies in which an abortion is typically required, there is no possibility for a live birth. “In many of these cases, the very same pregnancy complication means the fetus can’t survive regardless,” she said. “There’s not going to be any way to sustain that pregnancy.”

In such cases, she said, “what Idaho is doing is waiting for women to wait and deteriorate and suffer the lifelong health consequences with no possible upside for the fetus. It stacks tragedy upon tragedy.”

The U.S. government disputed conservative claims that the federal law allows abortion for mental health emergencies.

Mr. Turner said that EMTALA would allow emergency rooms to provide abortions for pregnant women who are experiencing depression and other mental health issues. Abortion opponents have said that this could be used as a loophole to allow many patients to obtain abortions despite state bans.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, another conservative, expressed some skepticism about Idaho’s claim. Justice Alito pressed the solicitor general about it.

“Let me be very clear about our position,” Ms. Prelogar replied. “That could never lead to pregnancy termination because that is not the accepted standard of practice to treat any mental health emergency.”

She said antipsychotic drugs and other psychiatric treatments would be administered to such patients. The treatment would not be abortion, she said, because “that won’t do anything to address the underlying brain chemistry issue that’s causing the mental health emergency in the first place.”

The federal emergency care law doesn’t require doctors who are morally opposed to abortion to provide them, the government said.

Justice Barrett and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. asked if EMTALA’s requirement for emergency medical care prevented emergency room doctors or hospitals with moral or religious objections from opting out of providing abortions.

The solicitor general said that federal conscience protections take precedence. So individual doctors can invoke conscience rights to avoid providing abortions, Ms. Prelogar said. And although she said it would be rare for an entire hospital to invoke a moral objection to terminating pregnancies in the kinds of medical emergencies that EMTALA applies to, hospitals with such objections could opt out as well.

Pam Belluck is a health and science reporter, covering a range of subjects, including reproductive health, long Covid, brain science, neurological disorders, mental health and genetics. More about Pam Belluck