The option to abort should be the mother's choice

Framework The UN Declaration of Human Rights established in 1948 manifests the idea of how people ought to be treated globally. Articles 2 and 3 are worth examining for the resolution. Article 2 states that all the rights established in the law are to be applied equally regardless of gender, color, religion etc. Article 3 says that everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person (2). This international doctrine needs to be followed as there was no specific wording in the resolution that implies that this should only apply to any specific country. The importance of this document has not gone unnoticed by medical ethicists. When making decisions medical ethics guarantees that one must balance the importance of autonomy, or the liberty to make decisions, against the general good that occurs. For instance, while restricting travel of infected people will certainly restrict their liberty of movement, it is generally considered just since the rest of the population benefits (3). The weighing mechanism is Rule Utilitarianism, or establishing rules and regulations for the benefit of the population. Thus, I must show that the benefits of keeping women’s decision in the case of abortion, thus I would be able to show that the UN Declaration of Human Rights is extended to the medical practice of abortion and win the debate. Thus, we need to examine what harms or benefits done by allowing women to have the autonomous decision in the abortion process. I do not need to prove that abortion needs to not pose harms, just that women making the decision has favorable effects for the rest of the world. When looking at allowing women to have abortions the clear answer is that there are more benefits than harms. Definitions Abortion should be defined as the following through the Cambridge Dictionary: “The intentional ending of a pregnancy.” Mother’s, for this debate since the mother would be the person getting the abortion and thus not really have offspring in some cases, would be any prospective person who would want an abortion. C1: Harms from restricting medical autonomy A. Rape-related abortions While there seems to be confusion on the amount of rape-related pregnancies in the US, the number generally given is anywhere from 3.1% to 5% in the time-period from 2004-2005 in the US alone, which is over 1,600 people conservatively estimated. This number was determined by estimating the probability of pregnancy through first intercourse by observing datasets from previous research, finding out how many people were raped, and applying the probability of pregnancy to the population suffering from abuse after subtracting the infertile population (4). This is only in the US, of course, and does not consider rapes that were not reported, which is an astronomical number. The Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault uses the Bureau of Justice Statistics numbers from 1994 to 2010 to determine that anywhere from 15.8% and 34% of sexual assault cases, much of which is rape, is not reported due to fear of the justice system, reprisal, or not being considered seriously by the police (5). In other words, in the US alone there is plenty of opportunities to be forcefully inseminated which violates women’s rights. Globally, roughly 1 in 10 women, or 120 million women have experienced forced sexual conduct, including forced intercourse (6). Worldwide we then can expect this number to be more than in the US, with less rights for women in the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Asia that muddle the ability of nations to penalize rape. This problem becomes worse when my opponent wants to limit the choices that women can make without approval from another party. Because the perpetrator of rape has restricted the liberty of the victim by forcing them into motherhood at young ages, the right of the affected party needs to be able to restore autonomy by undergoing abortion. In fact, it’s the most widely used option. The NCBI in a 1996 study analyzing rape-related abortion concluded 50% of the affected parties, hundreds of people in the US, underwent abortion as opposed to other options available (7). This choice is a coping mechanism when you consider rape and subsequent pregnancy has serious effects on mental health. Dean Kilpatrick of the Medical University of South Carolina shows that women who were raped were 5.5 times as likely to suffer from PTSD currently, and 6.2 times as likely to develop PTSD. Compare this with the mental effects of unwanted pregnancies, which the NCBI studied from 2008 to 2010, and realize that there is a 20-22% increased likeliness of maternal depression as well (9). The ability to provide this option to people affected, without the influence of others, will help those who choose it. The Guttmacher Institute concludes this in September 2013, showing that those who were denied abortions expressed more anger, resentment, etc. and harms one’s psyche (10). Under my opponent’s position, we would leave whether these people could have an abortion to other people, not the women in question who suffers these harms. B. Regression of women’s rights The NCBI in June of 2016 furthers, has concluded that women in lower-income or developing countries have less autonomy to make medical or financial decisions, especially in Nepal, India, and Bangladesh (11). By further restricting the right of the women worldwide to making medical decisions, no matter how reprehensible my opponent thinks the action is, we further subjugate the world population and set a precedent for future inadequacy in women’s rights. This limit to decision making and liberty also is coupled with things like honor killings, which is basically the killing of women when they “bring the family to shame.” 5000 of these killings occur per year from the date provided at the Honor Based Violence Awareness Network (12). If the international community would further restrict the autonomy of women, we are only allowing the patriarchal society to dominate in the world and justifying the inferiority of women in decision making that developing countries seemingly uphold. Regardless of the idea of abortion that my opponent seems to think is abhorrent, realize the international reaction if this were done worldwide and affirm. C2: Illegal abortion Regardless of the party chosen to allow for abortions, the party is going to be more restrictive than the people who need the abortion on principle. After all, the people consenting to the procedure who don’t want influence from any other party are the ones who advocate for the option the most. This restriction to legal services to provide abortions leads to the rise of illegal abortions. 42 million abortions are done a year, and roughly half of them are not done by a medical practitioner according to estimates from the NCBI in spring of 2009. This lead to over 60,000 deaths due to the lack of safety in these abortion (13). Thus, restricting autonomy kills people who undergo unsafe abortions. This brings undue harm to people simply because of the restrictive nations in which many of these women live. Regardless of the justness of abortion I am sure the death of women is not just. Women would be restricted from the party involved that allows women to have abortions, since the woman has no choice. Conclusion By observing the harms to society that disallowing women to choose their abortion we would allow, realize that we must extend the right of the women to have an abortion to fall under the UN doctrine and allow for the liberty to choose to have an abortion. 1. (http://tinyurl.com...) 2. ( http://tinyurl.com...) 3. (http://tinyurl.com...) 4. (http://tinyurl.com...) 5. (http://tinyurl.com...) 6. (http://tinyurl.com...) 7. (http://tinyurl.com...) 8. (http://tinyurl.com...) 9. (http://tinyurl.com...) 10. (http://tinyurl.com...) 11. (http://tinyurl.com...) 12. (http://tinyurl.com...) 13. (http://tinyurl.com...)