Annotated Bibliography: Abortion Laws

Abortion has seemingly become one of the most controversial topics, given that it receives criticism and support in equal measure. 2022 saw abortion rights become hotly contested following the Supreme Court ruling that essentially overturned the Roe v. Wade case, which had for a long time constitutionally guaranteed women the right to abortion. The judgment was greatly disapproved, with many arguing that it was a direct infringement of women’s human rights, which would result in reckless endangerment of life as unsafe abortions would be on the rise. In light of these, this paper seeks to discuss the effects of overregulating abortion in consideration of possible infringement of human rights, an increase in late-term abortions, and the foreseeable impact on Science and Healthcare.

Annotated Bibliography

Sargeant, P. (2022, June 29). Abortion: What does overturn of Roe v Wade mean? BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61804777

Paul examines the 2022 ruling on Roe v. Wade in an impartial way by analyzing the statistical figures of those likely to be greatly affected by the judgment passed. He considers several variables, including levels of education, age gap, and financial disparity, through the effective use of interactive tables. He further traces states that plan to introduce abortion restrictions while also providing key information such as the number of abortion clinics present per state and the number of abortions reported by the Guttmacher Institute. The author, Paul Sargeant, is a well-established and renowned journalist whose work has severally recognition owing to his in-depth exposure to pertinent matters affecting human life. The information relayed greatly contributed to the overall argument that no law should dictate the right of access to abortion as the vulnerable in society end up suffering the most from such retrogressive thinking.

Blazina, C. (2022, July 15). Key facts about the abortion debate in America. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/07/15/key-facts-about-the-abortion-debate-in-america/

The article debunks the major facts associated with the present debate on abortion. It focuses on the views of Americans in relation to Roe v. Wade. The writer analyses the level of disapproval regarding gender through a party lens where Democrats greatly disagree with the judgment. Blazina considers that part affiliation bears considerable weight when it comes to human rights pronouncements such as abortion. She further contends that Americans’ views have remained unchanged for quite a while, with the majority believing it is cruel to ban abortion. Notably, the article explores the aspect of absolutists, where different scenarios elicit deferring opinions from the general public concerning abortion. The author, Carrie Blazina, is a reputable digital producer who works at Pew Research Center. She has contributed numerously to the abortion topic, with her main concern always being the general public’s views. The article’s relevance lies in that all the relevant statistical data was obtained through extensive interaction with Americans.

Grossman, D. (2018, February 28). Overregulation is forcing women to have late-term abortions. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-grossman-remove-restrictions-on-medication-abortion-20180228-story.html

The article contends that adding hurdles to the issue of abortion would somewhat force women to obtain abortions during the later stages of the pregnancy. It asserts that the idea of overregulating abortion does not in any way deter those who prefer it. However, it argues that overregulation would only pressure women to seek out alternatives, such as the use of online medication whose quality is unknown. Grossman insists that enacting regulations on abortion only delays the inevitable as women who are determined tend to seek out options on their own, which often turns tragic. He explains that abortions at an early stage are safer than those during the late stage. Furthermore, Daniel maintains that it is already difficult for women to obtain the procedure; thus, adding more restrictions amounts to cruelty. Daniel Drossman is an accomplished professor at the department of obstetrics at the University of California. Also, he doubles as the director of ANSIRH, which is domiciled at Bixby Center. The article’s appropriateness has to do with its analysis of how restrictions on abortion only prevent women from getting medical abortions from licensed clinics, thus endangering their lives. Also, the paper reflects on the cruelty aspect by detailing that medical abortions are less intrusive than surgical abortions, which often happen after botched attempts at unlicensed individuals.<