WHAT IS ABORTION
Abortion, termination of a pregnancy
before birth, resulting in the death of the fetus. Some abortions occur
naturally because a fetus does not develop normally or because the mother has
an injury or disorder that prevents her from carrying the pregnancy to term.
This type of spontaneous abortion is commonly known as a miscarriage. Other
abortions are induced—that is, intentionally brought on—because a pregnancy is
unwanted or presents a risk to a woman’s health, or because the fetus is likely
to have severe physical or mental health problems.
Induced abortion, the focus of this article, is one of
today’s most intense and polarizing ethical and philosophical issues. Modern
medical techniques have made induced abortions simpler and less dangerous. But
in the United States, the debate over abortion has led to legal battles in the
courts, in the Congress of the United States, and state legislatures. The
debate has spilled over into confrontations, which are sometimes violent, at
clinics where abortions are performed.
This article discusses the most common methods used to
induce abortions, the social and ethical issues surrounding abortion, and the
history of the regulation of abortion in the United States.
METHODS OF ABORTION
Induced abortions are
performed using drugs or surgery. The safest and most appropriate method is
determined by the age of the fetus, which is calculated from the beginning of
the pregnant woman’s last menstrual period. Most pregnancies last an average of
39 to 40 weeks. This period is divided into three stages known as trimesters.
The first trimester consists of the first 13 weeks, the second trimester spans
weeks 14 to 28, and the third trimester lasts from the 29th week to birth.
Abortions in the first trimester of pregnancy are easier and safer to perform
while abortions in the second and third trimesters require more complicated procedures
and pose greater risks to a woman’s health. In the United States, a pregnant
woman’s risk of death from a first-term abortion is less than 1 in 100,000. The
risk increases by about 30 percent with each week of pregnancy after 12 weeks.
DRUG – BASE ABORTION METHOD
Drug-based abortion, also
known as medication abortion, typically requires that a woman take two types of
drugs within the first weeks of a confirmed pregnancy. In one method, a
pregnant woman first takes the drug mifepristone, also known as RU-486, which
blocks progesterone, a hormone needed to maintain the pregnancy. About 48 hours
later, she takes another drug called misoprostol. Misoprostol is a
prostaglandin (a hormone-like chemical produced by the body) that causes
contractions of the uterus, the organ in which the fetus develops. These
uterine contractions expel the fetus.
Another type of drug combination
that induces abortion is the use of misoprostol with methotrexate, an anticancer
drug that interferes with cell division. A physician first injects a pregnant
woman with methotrexate. About a week later, the woman takes a pill containing
misoprostol to induce uterine contractions and expel the fetus.
These drug-based abortion methods
effectively end pregnancy in approximately 96 percent of the women who take
them and are most effective when performed very early in a pregnancy. These
methods require no anesthesia. However, the use of drugs to induce abortion has
not been widely adopted by women in the United States for a number of reasons.
These drugs can cause unpleasant side effects—some women experience nausea,
cramping, and bleeding. More serious complications, such as arrhythmia, edema,
and pneumonia, affect the heart and lungs and may cause death. Perhaps the
primary deterrent is that these drug-based abortion methods require at least
two visits to a physician over a period of several days, and these methods are
no cheaper than a surgical abortion.
SURGICAL METHOD
ABORTION
Legal surgical abortion,
when done by a trained provider, is essentially 100 percent effective. A number
of surgical methods can be used to induce abortions. To end a pregnancy before
it reaches eight weeks, a doctor typically performs a preemptive abortion or
an early uterine evacuation. In both procedures a narrow tube called a
cannula is inserted through the cervix (the opening to the uterus) into the
uterus. The cannula is attached to a suction device, such as a syringe, and the
contents of the uterus, including the fetus, are extracted. Preemptive abortion
uses a smaller cannula and is performed in the first four to six weeks of
pregnancy. Early uterine evacuation, which uses a slightly larger cannula, is
performed in the first six to eight weeks of pregnancy. Both types of abortions
typically require no anesthesia and can be performed in a clinic or physician’s
office. The entire procedure lasts for only several minutes. In preemptive
abortions the most common complication is infection. Women who undergo early
uterine evacuation may experience heavy bleeding for the first few days after
the procedure.
Vacuum aspiration is a procedure used for abortions
in the 6th to 14th week of pregnancy. It requires that the cervix be dilated,
or enlarged, so that a cannula can be inserted into the uterus. Progressively
larger, tapered instruments called dilators may be used to dilate the cervix.
During the procedure, the cannula is attached to an electrically powered pump
that removes the contents of the uterus. In some cases, the lining of the
uterus must also be scraped with a spoonlike tool called a curette to loosen
and remove tissue. This procedure is referred to as curettage. Vacuum
aspiration may require local anesthesia and can be performed in a clinic or
physician’s office. Minor bruising or injuries to the cervix may occur when the
cannula is inserted.
Dilation and curettage (D&C), performed during the 6th to 16th week of
pregnancy, involves dilating the cervix and then scraping the uterine lining
with a curette to remove the contents. A D&C often requires general
anesthesia and must be performed in a clinic or hospital. Possible
complications include a reaction to the anesthesia and cervical injuries. Since
the development of vacuum aspiration, the use of D&C has declined.
After the first 16 weeks
of pregnancy, abortion becomes more difficult. One method that can be used
during this period is dilation and evacuation (D&E), which requires greater
dilation of the cervix than other methods. It also requires the use of suction,
a large curette, and a grasping tool called a forceps to remove the fetus.
D&E is a complicated procedure because of the larger size of the fetus and
the thinner walls of the uterus, which stretch to accommodate a growing fetus.
Bleeding in the uterus often occurs. D&E is often performed under general
anesthesia in a clinic or hospital. It is typically used in the first weeks of
the second trimester but can be performed up to the 24th week of pregnancy.
An induction abortion can
also be performed in the second trimester, usually between the 16th and 24th
week of pregnancy. In this type of abortion a small amount of amniotic
fluid, the fluid that surrounds the fetus, is withdrawn and replaced with
another fluid. About 24 to 48 hours later, the uterus begins to contract and
the fetus is expelled. When this method was first developed, physicians used a
strong saline (salt) solution to abort the fetus; today they may also use
solutions containing prostaglandins or pitocin, a synthetic form of a
chemical produced by the pituitary gland that induces labor. Heavy bleeding,
infection, and injuries to the cervix can occur. This procedure is performed in
the hospital and requires a stay of one or more days.
Abortions performed at the end of
the second trimester and during the third trimester require major surgery. Two
such late-term procedures include hysterotomy and intact dilation and
extraction. In hysterotomy, the uterus is cut open and the fetus is removed
surgically in an operation similar to a cesarean section, but a hysterotomy
requires a smaller incision. Hysterotomy is major abdominal surgery performed
under general anesthesia.
Intact dilation and extraction,
also referred to as a partial birth abortion, consists of partially removing
the fetus from the uterus through the vaginal canal, feet first, and using
suction to remove the brain and spinal fluid from the skull. The skull is then
collapsed to allow complete removal of the fetus from the uterus.
SOCIAL AND ETHICAL
ISSUES
Abortion has become one
of the most widely debated ethical issues of our time. On one side are
pro-choice supporters—individuals who favor a woman’s reproductive rights,
including the right to choose to have an abortion. On the other side are the
pro-life advocates, who may oppose abortion for any reason or who may only
accept abortion in extreme circumstances, as when the mother’s life would be
threatened by carrying a pregnancy to term. At one end of this ethical spectrum
are pro-choice defenders who believe the fetus is only a potential human being
when it becomes viable, that is, able to survive outside its mother’s womb.
Until this time the fetus has no legal rights—the rights belong to the woman
carrying the fetus, who can decide whether or not to bring the pregnancy to
full term. At the other end of the spectrum are pro-life supporters who believe
the fetus is a human being from the time of conception. As such, the fetus has
the legal right to life from the moment the egg and sperm unite. Between these
positions lies a continuum of ethical, religious, and political positions.
A variety of ethical arguments
have been made on both sides of the abortion issue, but no consensus or
compromise has ever been reached because, in the public policy debate, the most
vocal pro-choice and pro-life champions have radically different views about
the status of a fetus. Embryology, the study of fetal development,
offers little insight about the fetus’s status at the time of conception,
further confounding the issue for both sides. In addition, the point during
pregnancy when a fetus becomes viable has changed over the years as medical
advances have made it possible to keep a premature baby alive at an earlier
stage. The current definition of viability is generally accepted at about 24
weeks gestation; a small percentage of babies born at about 22 weeks gestation
have been kept alive with intensive medical care. Despite the most advanced
medical care, however, babies born prematurely are more at risk for long-term
medical and developmental problems.
This combination of medical
ambiguities and emotional political confrontations has led to considerable
hostility in the abortion debate. For many people, however, the lines between
pro-choice and pro-life are blurred and the issue is far less polarized. Many
women who consider themselves pro-life supporters are concerned about possible
threats to reproductive rights and the danger of allowing the government to
decide what medical options are available to them. Similarly, many pro-choice
individuals are deeply saddened by the act of abortion and seek to minimize its
use through better education about birth control, and, in particular, emergency
contraception, birth-control methods that prevent pregnancy after unprotected
sexual intercourse.
REGULATION OF ABORTION
Abortion has been practiced around the world
since ancient times as a crude method of birth control. Although many religions
forbade or restricted the practice, abortion was not considered illegal in most
countries until the 19th century. There were laws prior to this time, however,
that banned abortion after quickening—that is, the time that fetal
movement can first be felt. In 1803 England banned all abortions, and this
policy soon spread to Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Throughout the middle
and late 1800s, many states in the United States enacted similar laws banning abortion.
In the 20th century, however, many nations began to relax their laws against
abortion. The former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) legalized
abortion in 1920, followed by Japan in 1948, and several Eastern European
countries in the 1950s. In the 1960s and 1970s, much of Europe and Asia, along
with the United States, legalized abortion.
An estimated 46 million abortions are
performed worldwide each year, of which 20 million are performed in countries
where abortion is restricted or prohibited by law. Illegal abortions are more
likely to be performed by untrained people, in unsanitary conditions, or with
unsafe surgical procedures or drugs. As a result, illegal abortion accounts for
an estimated 78,000 deaths worldwide each year, or about one in seven
pregnancy-related deaths. In some African countries, illegal abortion may
contribute to up to 50 percent of pregnancy-related deaths. In Romania, where
abortion was outlawed from 1966 to 1989, an estimated 86 percent of
pregnancy-related deaths were caused by illegal abortion. In countries where
abortion is legal, less than 1 percent of pregnancy-related deaths are caused
by abortion.
LIGALIZATION OF
ABORTION IN UNITED STATES
An estimated 46 million abortions are
performed worldwide each year, of which 20 million are performed in countries
where abortion is restricted or prohibited by law. Illegal abortions are more
likely to be performed by untrained people, in unsanitary conditions, or with
unsafe surgical procedures or drugs. As a result, illegal abortion accounts for
an estimated 78,000 deaths worldwide each year, or about one in seven
pregnancy-related deaths. In some African countries, illegal abortion may
contribute to up to 50 percent of pregnancy-related deaths. In Romania, where
abortion was outlawed from 1966 to 1989, an estimated 86 percent of
pregnancy-related deaths were caused by illegal abortion. In countries where
abortion is legal, less than 1 percent of pregnancy-related deaths are caused
by abortion.
In 1976 the Supreme Court
recognized the right of pregnant girls under the age of 18, known as mature
minors, to have abortions. Three years later the Court ruled that states may
require the consent of one parent of a minor requesting an abortion. Parental
consent is not necessary if a confidential alternative form of review, such as
a judicial hearing, is made available for young women who choose not to involve
their parents. The Court stated that a judge in a hearing must approve a
minor’s abortion, in place of her parents, if the judge finds that the minor is
mature enough to make the decision on her own. If the judge finds that the
minor is not capable of making this decision on her own, he or she can decide
whether the abortion is in the minor’s best interest.
Since these decisions, about 40
states have enacted and enforced parental consent or notification laws,
although some laws have been contested in courts for years. In 1990, for
example, in Hodgson v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court upheld a law
requiring that prior notice be provided to both parents of a minor before an abortion
is performed. In a similar case arising in Ohio that same year, the court
upheld a requirement for notice or consent of one parent. In 2000, however, the
New Jersey Supreme Court struck down a law requiring parental notice for
unmarried girls under age 18.
Other state-imposed restrictions
regulate who pays for abortions, where abortions are performed, and what
information is provided to women seeking abortions. For example, in 1977 the
Supreme Court allowed states to limit the use of Medicaid funds (government
assistance for health care) for payment of elective abortions—that is,
those abortions not medically required. A law upheld by the Supreme Court in
1980 restricted the availability of federal Medicaid funding for abortions
deemed medically necessary. After that ruling, abortion payments for poor women
in many states were limited to cases in which pregnancy threatened the woman’s
life. Also in 1977, the Supreme Court allowed the city of St. Louis, Missouri,
to exclude elective abortions from procedures performed in a public hospital.
In 1983 the Court found
it unconstitutional to require that a woman considering an abortion be given
information developed by the state about risks or consequences and wait 24
hours after receiving information before having the abortion. Similarly, in
1986 the Court struck down a comprehensive Pennsylvania law requiring that
state-developed materials about abortion be offered to women undergoing the
procedure.
Since the 1989 Supreme Court
decision in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, the Court
has permitted several state-imposed restrictions to stand. The Webster
case upheld a Missouri law that prohibits the use of public facilities or
public employees for abortion and requires a physician to determine the viability
of a fetus older than 20 weeks before performing an abortion. In the 1991 case
of Rust v. Sullivan, the Court upheld a federal policy that
prevented health-care providers who received federal funding from engaging in
any activities that encouraged or promoted abortion as a method of family
planning. President Bill Clinton later revoked this policy in 1993.
In 1992 the Supreme Court
decided Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey,
a case in which the Court reaffirmed the central ruling of Roe v. Wade—that
no undue burden on access to abortion should exist for a woman over 18 years of
age prior to fetal viability. But the case also permitted states more freedom
in regulating abortion. The Court overturned prior rulings, making it possible
for states to again require that a woman be given state-developed information
about abortion risks and consequences and wait 24 hours before undergoing the
procedure.
In 1996 the Congress of
the United States enacted a bill banning the practice of so-called partial
birth abortions, also known as the intact dilation and extraction procedure.
President Clinton vetoed the law because it failed to permit use of the
procedure when a fetus displays severe abnormalities or when carrying a
pregnancy to term presents a serious threat to a woman’s health or life. Over
30 states passed laws in the 1990s banning use of the procedure.
In June 2000, in Stenberg
v. Carhart, the Supreme Court struck down a Nebraska ban on partial
birth abortion. The Court stated that the ban was an unconstitutional violation
of both Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern
Pennsylvania v. Casey. But after Congress passed the Partial Birth
Abortion Ban Act of 2003 and President George W. Bush signed it into law, the
Court revisited the issue in a 2007 ruling in Gonzales v. Planned
Parenthood and Gonzales v. Carhart. This time, with Justice
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. replacing the retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the
Court upheld the ban on the partial birth abortion procedure in a 5 to 4
decision. Under the law, physicians who perform the banned procedure could face
fines and up to two years in prison. The law allows for use of intact dilation
and extraction only in cases where the mother’s life is endangered without the
procedure.
Since the Supreme Court ruling
that legalized abortion in 1973, opponents of abortion have worked continuously
to reverse the decision. They have lobbied state and federal officials to place
restrictions on women seeking abortions or on individuals providing abortions.
They have also held protests directed at clinics that perform abortions and, in
some cases, have accosted and obstructed patients and health-care providers at
such clinics. In May 1994 the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act was
enacted, which made it a federal crime to use force, threat of force, or
physical obstruction to injure, intimidate, or interfere with reproductive
health-care providers and their patients. That same year, in a case known as Madsen
v. Women’s Health Center, the Supreme Court upheld the basic right
to protest in peaceful, organized demonstrations outside abortion clinics. But
the case upheld a Florida law that created a 36 ft (11 m) buffer zone around a
clinic to ensure that demonstrations do not prevent access to clinics or
disrupt clinic operations. In February 1997 the Court upheld buffer zones
around clinics but struck down certain floating, or moveable, buffer zones
around individuals approaching clinics.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in
2007 upholding the federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 was expected
to spur further attempts to restrict abortion, if not overturn Roe v. Wade.
Supporters of the right to abortion noted that the Court’s majority opinion in
the 2007 decision represented the first time since the 1973 Roe ruling
that the Court permitted a ban on an abortion procedure, effectively intruding
on the privacy of a decision between a woman and her physician. Supporters of
the ruling countered that the Court’s decision addressed the moral and ethical
concerns put forward by opponents of abortion. They cited Justice Anthony
Kennedy’s argument in the majority opinion that “the government has a
legitimate and substantial interest in preserving and promoting fetal life.”
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Fill free to add your comment or any information bothering you about the site politely. Thanks for your comments in advance.