Every year in the United States 25% of all pregnancies results in an abortion, this adds up to over a million abortions a year. This clearly illustrates that there is problem of over aborting innocent fetuses in our society. I am a firm believer that abortion should be restricted, to minimize its use. I believe that our current society is using abortion as a form of contraceptive. I believe abortion does have its place, and should not be banned altogether. However I do believe when it is used form of birth control that it is being used incorrectly.
When examining the issue of abortion there are many questions to consider. What if the mother wants the baby, and the father doesnt? What if the father wants the baby and the mother doesnt? What if the decision is made to abort the fetus in the first trimester as opposed to the second or third trimesters? What if the mother was impregnated by an act of rape? What if going on with the pregnancy could cause harm to mother? All of these questions raised are touchy issues. All of these questions bring up good points for both sides of this debate.
Many people who are pro choice claim that the mother has a right to privacy, and to deny them the decision to abort is going against this right. They believe that since this decision affects the womens body, that this should be her private business. I really dont like this argument. I believe that the right to privacy no longer exists when the decision effects more than the person involved in the decision. When a woman makes the decision to have an abortion it affects many people involved, rather than just the mother. The father is also greatly affected by this decision. The father should have equal say in this decision making process. In any case that the father wants to keep the child, the woman should not have the right to abort. This theory work both ways, if the mother wants to keep on with the pregnancy and the father wants to terminate it, by no means should the mother have to grant the father his wishes. I think John Stuart Mills harm principle supports my argument. Mills principle believes that a person has a right to do whatever they choose as long as they cause no harm, or the potential of harm to others. When a mother makes a decision to abort the pregnancy the father can defiantly be mentally harmed by her decision.
Another issue about abortion is when the abortion actually occurs. A pregnancy is divided into three time periods. These time periods are called trimesters. Each trimester is 13 weeks, which adds up to 9 months, the duration of a normal pregnancy. The question about this issue is when does actual human life begin. Many people feel in the first trimester that the fetus is not viable. If the fetus cannot survive on its own, then it is not a life, so it can be terminated. I dont like this argument either. I believe once conception occurs that there is a valuable life in existence. I realize that it may not be able to survive on its own, but there is still enough there to protect. After learning of a pregnancy many excited expecting families begin to prepare for their new addition. They have baby showers, build a baby room and buy baby cloths as well as many other items in preparation for this big event. Surely they are not making all these decisions without knowing for sure if a baby is on the way. They are making these arrangements happen because they know what is going to happen in near future. The fetus might not be viable at the time of all these plans, but they know in the matter of months it will be. This argument also works both ways. People, who decide to abort the fetus, know damn well they are discontinuing a potential life. Even if the fetus cant survive on its own, it is only a matter of a few short months before it will be able to. When a mother concludes that she