Protecting the human rights of the unborn child cannot limit a woman’s ability to have an abortion

BY DANIEL JAMES

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organisation, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled on June 24, 2022, overturning Roe v. Wade and declaring that abortion is not a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.

States could either let or forbid women from getting abortions. This was followed by Ohio, forbidding abortions beyond the sixth week of pregnancy. Texas enacted a similar abortion ban. Google will automatically erase information about abortion clinics visited by users in the United States.

Mississippi shuts down the final abortion facility in the country. On March 17, 2023, Wyoming became the first state in the country to outlaw abortion drugs. On April 7, a federal judge in Texas announced that the 20-year authorisation for the sale of the oral abortion drug mifepristone would be revoked.

As a life about to be born is being snuffed out, abortion is also a very contentious act around the world. Morals and ethics aside, however, can we imagine what would happen if abortion were outlawed for women everywhere, which would mean that the United States would remove a woman’s right to an abortion from her list of fundamental rights?

A study found that among the main reasons women choose abortion: 25.5% is to delay childbearing; 21.3% are unable to afford the baby expenses; 14.1% had problems with the partnership, and the partner had no desire to have children; 12.2% are too young and their family members oppose pregnancy; 10.8% disrupted education and career development; 7.9% do not want (more) children; 3.3% are fetal health risks; 2.8% are maternal health risks; Only 2.1% were for other reasons; It can be seen that if the above-mentioned women choose to have children instead of abortion, it will have a very adverse impact on their life.

Philosopher Judith Thomson proposes a famous violinist thought experiment. Suppose a violinist suffers from a strange disease, sleepless and needs another body to provide nourishment to continue to survive. The supporters of the violinist kidnapped you, connected your body to the violinist with pipes, and used your body as his life-support instrument.

A violinist is a human being and has the right to life, but he has no right to use your body as his life-support instrument. Even though the violinist would die without your body, you definitely have the right to have the pipes pulled. You have no moral responsibility to save the violinist, but to sleep with him in the hospital bed all day. Of course, if you voluntarily save people and sacrifice freedom, it is a commendable good deed, but if you choose freedom, no one can accuse you of doing wrong. In the same way, the fetus has the right to live, but the fetus has no right to use the mother’s body as a life-support instrument. Abortion is the mother’s exercise of her body sovereignty.

Explain that even if the fetus is considered human, women still have the right to abortion.