Last updated on July 2, 2026
Photo from Vinicius Tavares for DWF
Abortions, one of the most private decisions imaginable, has found its way into public protesters’ and politicians’ hearts as a wrong that must be corrected, re-corrected, and then corrected back again. The constant push and pull on this issue that engulfs the United States in the current political climate has cost lives through the lense of both sides.
So, who’s right and which direction is this issue heading?
To start, it’s important to properly understand what an abortion is exactly. “[An] abortion is a medical procedure used to terminate a pregnancy and is a critical component of reproductive healthcare,” the NIH publishes. “This procedure is one of the most common procedures performed among women. In the United States, it is estimated that 1 in 4 women will have an abortion in their lifetime.” Basically, when a woman gets an abortion she seeks medical help to end a pregnancy. She may want to do this for a number of reasons, whether it be protecting her health in the unfortunate scenario where the baby she’s carrying won’t survive birth, not being financially prepared to raise children, or simply not wanting to have kids at that moment.
Abortion was legalized nationally in the United States back in 1973 in the case Roe v. Wade. This meant that no matter what state you lived in, you were able to access medical assistance with an abortion. Before Roe v. Wade, abortion was illegal in most US states, driving women to dangerous alternatives.
“Before the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, abortions were prohibited in 33 states and only allowed in special circumstances in 13 others,” Amna Nawaz reveals in an interview with PBS. “Women in those states still had abortions, some through unsafe, so-called back alley procedures. Others tried to induce abortions themselves.” These back-alley procedures women sought out when faced with no other option were extremely dangerous, being performed by untrained individuals in non-medical environments. When women couldn’t even access a back-alley abortion, they would often take matters into their own hands by inserting sharp objects into their uterus, consuming poisonous mixtures, or using botanical products. It’s estimated that thousands of women died at the hands of these harmful self-attempts to terminate a pregnancy.
But that was back then. What’s happening with abortion now?
“In a historic and far-reaching decision, the U.S. Supreme Court officially reversed Roe v. Wade.” NPR reported upon the world receiving the news that the constitutional right to abortion, upheld for almost half a century, no longer exists. This change was made on June 24, 2022, completely altering the lives of millions of women in America. While abortion wasn’t completly outlawed in the United States, the decision was turned over to the states. As of the publication of this piece, abortion has been banned in 13 states completely and has been given heavy limitations in another 10.
Still, the biggest question remains, why do any of these states even want to ban abortion?
Well, it starts and ends with the concept of life. To put it in extremely basic terms, the movement against abortion believes that the fetus the mother seeks to remove is a living person. Therefore, when you terminate the pregnancy via an abortion, you are effectively killing a human being and committing an act of murder. Through these lense, it’s easy to see why the idea of an abortion could be deeply unsettling.
Of course, science will play a huge part in this definition clarification. But before we get into that, what exactly are the two sides to this debate?
The two sides are well-coordinatingly titled pro-life and pro-choice. Pro-life, the more conservative end of the argument, argues that abortion should not be allowed because it falls under the category of murder. Pro-choice, the more liberal side, argues that abortion should be allowed because a fetus isn’t considered a living person and abortion protects women whose lives are currently existing.
So, what does science say regarding the supposed “life” of a fetus?
While there are a wide variety of “scientifc opinions” out there, the main consensus appears to be that life begins at conception as the American College of Pediatricians writes, “The predominance of human biological research confirms that human life begins at conception.” This means that most of science would side with pro-life’s argument if the basis was to not want to kill any living being. However, that’s not their entire argument. It’s that killing any human is morally wrong. So when does that life turn into a proper human being? Well, now the answer becomes even more unclear.
“There is no clear consensus in regard to determining when personhood is established,” the NIH explains. “A human life may be considered a human person at fertilization. On the other hand, others attribute personhood once the physical appearance of a fetus resembles the mature human form at about week 9 (…) Alternatively, a human being may come to be a person when the central nervous system is developed and organs are functioning (…) at about twenty-six weeks gestation.”
Considering the scientific view, both sides technically do have a claim to their arguments depending on which theory you subscribe to. Science doesn’t favor either side more than the other, so the morality argument is nearly a wash across the board.
With that being said, neither side is content with letting the other one off scot free. It has to be their way or the other. There are few better examples of this than crisis pregnancy centers.
“[Crisis pregnancy centers are] facilities that represent themselves as legitimate reproductive health care clinics,” ACOG reveals. “But actually aim to dissuade people from accessing certain types of reproductive health care, including abortion care and even contraceptive options.” The staff at these facilities often go to great lengths to try to get the women who come in to change their mind about having an abortion. This includes giving dubious information to clients with one example being that abortions supposedly cause cancer. They don’t.
While crisis pregnancy centers and their methods may seem unethical, they are 100% legal because they fall just short of the line for them to be regulated as health care providers. It’s also perfectly legal to try to persuade people to do things that you think are best. Many women who walk into crisis pregnancy centers leave deciding to not have an abortion after all. But, the ability to have the freedom of choice is what’s critical and now targetted.
As legislation begins to slide further to the pro-life side, what’s pro-choice’s claim to their argument?
First and foremost, pro-choice does not advocate for infanticide, killing a baby already born. In fact, very few pro-choice supporters believe that a baby should be aborted after the 24-week mark with the exception of if the procedure would be life-saving to the expecting woman. They also do not hope to push abortion onto women who don’t think abortion aligns well with their values. “Generally, people who identify as “pro-choice” believed that people have the right to control their own bodies,” Planned Parent Hood clarifies. “Everyone should be able to decide when and whether to have children.”
It’s essential to remember that abortion laws affect all women of nearly every age where they are viable to have a baby, including young girls. In these cases, having access to abortion, or rather not having it, is life-changing. Forcing a 12-year-old girl to take on the responsibility of parenthood is extremely problematic for a number of reasons including lack of income, school responsibilities, and having to go through labor. Both apart from and including teenage girls, victims of rape would also be subjected to whatever abortion bans exist in their state.
The main rally behind pro-life’s side is the morality argument, but if you’re going to stand by that then you have to look further into the future after the baby is born. Would that baby grow up in a home where they have enough to eat? Enough time to be nurtured? Would they even remain with their mother? While banning abortion may mean a child born, it doesn’t always mean a child clothed, fed, or loved. Because of these reasons, pro-choice supporters believe that having access to abortion is non-negotiable if women want to maintain any freedom over their own futures, bodies, and lives.
Besides the freedom argument, there’s also a medical side to pro-choice’s stance as well.
“One of the most common reasons I help women to terminate their pregnancy is because their water is broken [early in pregnancy] and they have an infection,” Stacey Beck, MD explains in an interview conducted by Reuters. “If there’s a clear sign of infection, the condition can be life threatening (…) If she continues the pregnancy it comes at a very high risk of death.” In many scenarios, an abortion can be a life-saving procedure for the woman expecting. Even if the woman wants to keep her baby, it’s sometimes safer for her to get the abortion rather than risk her life in labor. However, when states ban or restrict abortion, the life-saving care they depend on disappears.
In the end, the solution to the abortion controversy is both mind-wreckingly complicated and frustratingly simple. When you have one side backed up by science, stories, and decades of mistakes against another that will refuse to believe anything except the deep conviction that they’re correct, it makes compromise nearly impossible. Especially when neither side is willing to give any leeway at all because both see “compromise” as the middle ground between sanity and insanity.
The unfortunate truth is that women will always seek out an abortion, whether it’s legal or not. It’s up to lawmakers to decide whether or not they achieve the procedure through safe, legal means, or by
The future of abortion and the lives of millions of women in America will remain in the hands of the lawmakers who control their state. And, those who choose to use their power to shape the debate don’t just decide for themselves or their family. They will be trusted to speak for all of the women they represent, deserved or not.
Be First to Comment