Abortion: A Woman’s Choice, Right, or An Issue for social Judgement? - Page 2

After the Roe Vs Wade judgement, there were heart-wrenching reactions like this on social media.

Another story ---

Last October, Samiksha*, a Class 10 student in Delhi, went to get her phone recharged. The mobile shop owner, Dharmender, took her number and started stalking her. Over the next couple of months, he allegedly raped her repeatedly, blackmailing her into silence.

When she got pregnant, Dharmender allegedly took her to a seedy clinic in Narela where the 14-year-old was given some abortion pills by a quack and sent home. But a few days later, she started complaining of severe pain and excessive bleeding. Her worried parents took her to a government hospital, where doctors found that the minor was suffering from incomplete abortion.

A 15-year-old’s recent death from abortion pills in TN shows how social taboos force women to rely on unscrupulous backstreet quacks.

The social stigma on this issue is putting many young lives in danger.

Because she will be the one bearing the brunt, will be under pressure from all sides, and will have to cope with all those difficult circumstances, it should be a woman's personal decision.

Originally posted by: Chir-Cute

Mind if I dive into this discussion?

I saw this clip on Insta a while ago & I think that one question is sufficient to answer about who should be making the decisions in regards to a woman's body.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Ced7K6NvTcg/

It is really painful to see women treated as second grade citizens in their own country!

They have to go to far off places to undergo abortions where it is legally viable.

Travel expenses, and travel to an unknown place with pain and trauma, .... are we living in a human society???

If anybody is against abortion (abortion for whatever reason) they should be ready to be available emotionally, financially, and physically for that mother and child for the rest of their life. If they are not ready for that, their concern is freaking shallow and empty, do not trust them with anything.

Including Queer/Trans/Intersex people too

Abortion rights activists protest in Washington, DC, on June 26, 2022, two days after the US Supreme Court scrapped half-century constitutional protections for the procedure.

For abortion providers and funders in the USA, the next round of this fight is about more than politics and law. It's become increasingly about money and logistics: providing women in states that restrict abortions the option — and the resources — to travel to states where abortion is legal and accessible.

A long list of major corporations — including Amazon, Tesla, Nike, Google, Starbucks, Disney, and Dick's Sporting Goods — have announced that they will cover travel expenses for employees seeking abortions. Some commentators, like NPR's own Gene Demby, are asking about the fine print of these policy announcements.

In India, the law supports medical abortion to make it safer for women — it was among the first countries to do so. But in practice, 50 years on, it is still difficult to get an abortion, because of the societal pressures, and the associated stigma.

Originally posted by: Viswasruti

In India, the law supports medical abortion to make it safer for women — it was among the first countries to do so. But in practice, 50 years on, it is still difficult to get an abortion, because of the societal pressures, and the associated stigma.

And most people don't even prefer having an abortion despite the doctors suggesting it. A single "woman" can't get abortion without her "husband's" approval.

TW: Death

One of my distant cousin was advised to get an abortion since the foetus was embedded in the fallopian tube, which is a very risky pregnancy and usually affects the child's development. But the family did not agree to it as it was their first child. She went through a pregnancy, premature birth, child was in hospital on/off and barely survived for an year before leaving for a better world. Everyone still blames the cousin for going through the pregnancy despite the risks involved. The child barely "lived" amidst all the medications and it's a lifelong pain for the family of losing their first born.

TLDR : Sometimes just do what the doctors suggest, keeping your emotions at bay.

I am pro-abortion, meaning that I recognize the need for every obstetrician and every general physician who monitors pregnant women/persons to receive training to end a pregnancy safely. Stillbirths that poison the pregnant woman's/person's bloodstream, spontaneous abortions that decay in the uterus, and ectopic pregnancies that will damage other organs all need intervention. When governments allow medical schools to skip abortion in their curriculum, or fail to make clinics with abortion services available in every community, that is an existential threat to women (and others capable of pregnancy). It is not enough for abortion to be legal by statute; it has to be both constitutionally protected and readily available.

Laws against sex-selective abortion are misguided. If you can order a woman/person to give birth to a female child, knowing that her family will make their lives impossible, you can also order her to give birth to a child with a severe disability, knowing that she'll spend the rest of her life as the primary caregiver, or you can dictate her fecundity in other ways. Allowing a woman/person to seek abortion after finding out the sex of the fetus is better because at least there's the possibility of counselling, reporting coercion to abort, and escape from abusive marriage.

Viswasruti, kindly correct the date in your first post. Roe v. Wade was decided in January of 1973, not 1998. It was overturned on June 24, 2022, in a U.S. Supreme Court decision called Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.

I disagree with Viswasruti's assertion: "No one understands why Roe vs. Wade made such a severe judgement all of a sudden now." People who have tracked political efforts over decades understand very well that this was inevitable after recent rushed confirmations to the U.S. Supreme Court with nominees who perjured themselves on this question.

Since Viswasruti has begun a discussion of TV depiction of reproductive health ... There was a Marathi daily drama, Khulatā Kaḷī Khulenā, in which the male lead, an obstetrician, remarked, "I have given life to so many babies; how could I end a baby's life?" If it were any other branch of health care, what would we think of a doctor who claims that he only handles happy outcomes?

When the pregnant character on Khulatā Kaḷī Khulenā went to a clinic, she was told contemptuously, "You cannot have an abortion unless your husband and his entire household give their permission." And the person saying this hit her in the face with the medical forms, just for emphasis. Later, an obstetrician character said, "Your health is too fragile for an abortion; you have to go on with the pregnancy." All of this is total misinformation and dangerous to anyone in the audience who doesn't know her rights, but irresponsible writers will do anything for cheap drama.

On the Marathi hagiographical serial BāḷūMāmācyā Nāvānaṃ Çāṅgabhalaṃ, a man who blames his wife for suffering a stillbirth while he was determined to stop it by spiritual effort is portrayed as a saint. No matter how much the audience laps up misogynistic content, it's irresponsible of the creative team to provide it.

As a woman Roe v. Wade overturning has hit me hard.

Every woman should have to RIGHT to Choose and Decide if they want to carry a pregnancy to term, No WOMAN and I MEAN NO WOMAN should be diminished for choosing herself FIRST, if they are Physically, Emotionally, Mentally, Financially NOT READY to bear a child, that is that Woman's right to decide, not the society, not LAW, not in-Laws and definitely not others who have no idea what that person is going through.

I am a WOMAN first but everyone around me forgets that, they see me as a mother, someone who should sacrifice herself and forget herself to raise and put her child first. I will not deny I am my child's biggest advocate but I am not going to put my child ahead of me. I am my own person first then a career oriented ambitious woman and then a mother.

I am not selfish for putting my own interests first, for wanting 10 extra minutes of sleep or wanting to be away from my child to take a breather, all of this makes me human.

We as a society never question a Man when they don't contribute equally to raising a child, not monetarily but with their time. A man is never questioned for working late but a Woman and/or a Mother is. A man is never questioned for not knowing how to cook or for not cooking for their child but a woman and mother is.

That's what needs to stop.

We as WOMEN SHOULD Stop judging other women for their choices. Our personal beliefs should NOT be imposed on anyone else!!

@BrhannadaArmour

I appreciate your interest on this subject and your perspective on abortion and the long-standing stigma and pain experienced by women everywhere.

Regarding the case's date issue -- In fact the case began in 1970 when “Jane Roe”—a fictional name used to protect the identity of the plaintiff, Norma McCorvey ,instituted a federal action against Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County, Texas, where Roe resided. The Supreme Court disagreed with Roe’s assertion of an absolute right to terminate pregnancy in any way and at any time, and attempted to balance a woman’s right of privacy with a state’s interest in regulating abortion.

Regulations restricting "basic rights," such as privacy and the freedom to make decisions for her body and mind, are justified by a "compelling state interest."

Repeated challenges since then and again in 1973 narrowed the scope of Roe v. Wade but did not overturn it. The case came again for hearing in 1992, the Supreme Court established that restrictions on abortion are unconstitutional if they place an “undue burden” on a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus is viable. There were consequential hearings for and against abortion in the USA court.

A few facts about this case , previous and present --

The Appellant in the present case was Norma McCorvey (named Jane Roe in court documents !!). Jane Roe was a pregnant woman who wished to obtain an abortion. She approached the Texas District Court on behalf of her and other related women in 1969 to prevent the enforcement of Texas laws that criminalize abortion except that were performed for saving a woman’s life.

The case was filed under the 1st, 4th, 5th 9th and 14th Amendments.

At that time, abortion could legally be undertaken in Texas only when it was medically advised by the doctors, to save the life of the pregnant woman. On this basis, Roe was not permitted to have an abortion, as there was no threat to her life. She pleaded it as an unwanted invasion of her right to privacy granted under the fourteenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Previously, she had given birth to two children, but they were given up for adoption. She wanted to terminate her third pregnancy. There were two options with Roe, either to travel to the places where it was safe and legal to abort, or to pay hefty fees to doctors for performing the abortion secretly.

Since Roe was an impoverished woman with a weak financial status, either of the options was not feasible. She was even unsuccessful in getting an illegal abortion.

Therefore she approached the Court demanding the right to abort her third child. In 1970, the District Court of Texas ruled that the abortion laws were illegal, and they inherently violated the constitutional right to privacy under the ninth and fourteenth amendment. It further ruled that the Statute was vague, unconstitutional, and infringed the Appellant’s Ninth Amendment rights.

Hence, keeping in mind all the aspects, the Court ruled that the right to privacy extends to the woman’s right to control her pregnancy. The right to abortion was a fundamental choice of women protected under the fourteenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Interestingly, many people believe that Roe’s case legalized abortion. However, that’s not the case. Roe’s case created a framework for striking a balance between the rights of women and the State. It led to the determination of the State’s limit to interfere in the women’s right to abortion under the right to privacy.

Due to differing opinions on this subject, the US abortion policy was altered in 1980,1992 and again in 1998, which altered countless lives. Then the US Supreme Court's Roe vs. Wade decision in 1998 acknowledged that women could only participate freely and equitably in society if they could have the freedom to make autonomous pregnancy decisions.

The decision struck down many federal and state abortion laws and fueled an ongoing debate in the United States about whether, or to what extent, abortion should be legal, who should decide the legality of abortion, the involved childbearing lady or the country's judiciary?!