Opinion against Rachel Lu’s Pro-Life Article by a Pro-Choice Feminist
In the last few decades, the American society has witnessed the growth of two ideologies – pro-life and pro-choice, that are primarily concerned with birthrights. On their part, pro-life advocates argue that abortion is immoral and should be banned, while their counterparts (I included) generally believe that everyone has the basic human right to decide when and whether to have a child/children. When you say you are pro-choice, it effectively means that you believe it is all right for people to consider abortion as an option for unplanned pregnancy – even if you would not consider abortion yourself.
For most pro-choice opponents, it is their faith that informs that position. Indeed, from the onset, Catholics are taught not to take the life of an unborn child. Nevertheless, whether Catholic or not, abortion is more of a moral question that women experiencing unwanted pregnancy have to grapple with. In truth, there are situations where even a rigorist conscience can compromise, for instance, when faced with rape or when the life of the mother is in jeopardy. Add to this the fact that we live in a multi-lateral society. Therefore, one group’s moral and religious beliefs should not be forced onto another without consultation or a general societal consensus. Going by the facts at the moment, the American society does not have consensus when it comes to abortion. Therefore, a political solution like overturning the Roe v Wade decision is more likely to create a society that promotes women’s oppression, which is the complete opposite of Rachel Lu’s emergent society in her article “A pro-life world can be good for women. Here’s how.” If anything, such an undertaking will override women’s right to their own bodies, consequently placing them at the mercies of a women-biased patriarchal system.
While it’s safe to assume that abortion benefits certain groups in the society, it is misleading for Lu to claim that abortion is “especially helpful to men who exploit women sexually.” On the contrary, abortion favors women facing an unwanted pregnancy, specifically those that have been assaulted, and to a larger extent. In such cases, abortion presents a plausible and effective solution because it helps put the assault behind them so that they can continue with their lives and also helps avoid additional trauma resulting from giving birth to the so-called “rapists’ children.” To some degree, abortion is empowering women. It gives them the right over their bodies. The right to do what they want, whenever they want. Banning abortion plays them right into the hands of illegal abortionists. This argument essentially underlines the fact that women are important players in the abortion debate. As such, they should not be treated as containers for the fetuses. However, just because “pro-choicers” champion for the rights of the pregnant woman does not mean they take a callous attitude or maintain a bias towards the fetus; the opposite is actually true. Pro-choice proponents acknowledge that opting for abortion presents the least bad choice among a collection of bad choices.
Moreover, pro-choice ideologies are designed to promote the woman-empowerment agenda. Specifically, our support for abortion as a solution for unwanted pregnancies is pro-woman. Legal abortion helps improve the health and safety of the woman in question. Considering that some pregnancies can have adverse medical effects on the mother, the only way to ensure the woman’s safety is to carry out an abortion. To add to this, pregnancy is a choice. However, in most cases, women do not become pregnant by choice. In such a situation, it is wrong to force such a woman to remain pregnant when they clearly don’t want to. For such a woman, procuring an abortion remains the most viable option. Thus, when we illegalize abortion many women will suffer the heavy burden of carrying a child they are not willing to bear, leave alone bring up. This will compound to the daily upheavals women face in the current American society.
Lu’s article rightly observes that pregnancy leaves women exposed to societal exploitation. Add the fact that the pregnancy is unplanned for, and what you have is a “disaster” in the making. Pregnant women are often subject to unfair treatment in the society. Most of the time they are forced to resign to whatever fate the society decides and inflict on them. For instance, owing to a pregnancy resulting from rape, a woman may find herself being ridiculed by the society. Such ridicule may impact their psychological well-being as well as that of the fetus. For career women, unplanned pregnancies can be a hindrance to their career growth. Unplanned pregnancies for some of them effectively means surrendering their positions, changing their future career plans, or resigning/termination. Thus, securing an abortion presents a perfect solution to their problem.
Lastly, it goes without saying that unplanned parenthood can have detrimental effects on women. Experts observe that unplanned motherhood tends to increase postpartum depression. Taking into consideration social and economic factors, women with unplanned pregnancies are less likely to have access to prenatal care. As a result, they tend to give birth to premature babies, and babies with low birth weight. Additionally, these children report poor physical and mental health compared to those born from intended pregnancies.
In conclusion, for “choicers” right to an abortion is a basic equality right. The ability to determine if and when a woman becomes a parent determines their level of participation in the society. Therefore, this right should only be left to women decide, and not the political class. Contrary to Rachel Lu’s argument, the overturning of Roe v Wade is inclined to result in a society where women have zero rights over their own bodies; A society with broken families, unwanted babies, and economic hardships.