Saturday, June 06, 2009
It is indeed extremely hard in any government's part to create policy solutions to address morally enveloped issues, all because of the anticipated clash between polar oppositions, from religion versus state, the right-winged versus the leftists, to the machos versus the feminists. As it is, consensus will never be arrived at since the subject involves an ethical item. Abortion is one such issue too difficult to develop policy solutions for, because prioritizing the rights of the expectant mother is necessarily subordinating those of the carried fetus, and vice versa. As of the moment, democratic countries protect the rights of women in the initial phase of pregnancy until later on when the rights of the unborn are recognized, the mother's decision notwithstanding.
Conscious of women's freedoms to privacy and choice—rights that are enshrined in the supreme law of the land, I resolve that abortion be legalized provided that the operation is therapeutic in nature and performed under “medical supervision in approved hospital settings” (Smith). If carrying a human inside one's womb entails risking the very life of the pregnant woman, then it must be the woman's choice to eradicate that danger by opting to have the baby aborted. In the end, the argument of the defeated pro-life move after the fetus is aborted should be settled by the redeeming value of saving the mother's life instead—a pro-life manifestation all the same.
It is better to allow women to have abortion as a pro-choice decision because as it continues to remain illegal, it will not prohibit operations from happening nonetheless. This renders pregnant women into helplessly having unauthorized operations performed on them in hazardous, unsanitary manners, causing their eventual deterioration. Also, by having doctors hold the women hostage regarding their reproductive decisions, the legal accountabilities of these medical practitioners as well as the objective of the state in normalizing the procedure will not be clarified unless the legislation is exercised (Brodie, Gavigan and Jenson). Abortion's incriminating repercussions crubs women's right to choose, defeating their autonomy (Brodie, Gavigan and Jenson).
The unsettled conflict between pro-life and pro-choice movements regarding abortion will rage and rage unless the legislators break the silence of the laws and the government adopts an unambiguous position on the issue (Tatalovich). This floating condition causes this abortion issue to wreak more extended constitutional controversy than it deserves (Steiner). It must be pointed out too that the ambiguity of the legislation and the careless enforcement of the same contributes to the gravity of not knowing what is authorized and what is not (Gentles). The Charter does not speak clearly of abortion and the right to privacy (Morton), hence the responsibility of the legislature to define thoroughly the provisions of the Charter in order to have its purposes served to the fullest extent.