Abortions U.S Compares to Israel Law

...

and non-legally. It is preferable to create a better reform regarding the abortion law so that woman will not need to go through dangerous procedures that are not supervised (black market). On the other hand, 97% of the requests get approved so pro life proponents can say that the current situation is not that bad and works perfectly for the women and for the fetus’s interests.

As for the U.S law, the main principle under the constitutional law is the right to privacy. In comparison, having to ask for permission such as in Israel to have an abortion would be an undue burden on the woman’s right to privacy. It is invasive and embarrassing for the women to go through that. The U.S law in generally demands a waiting period between the decision and the abortion itself, the women needs to pass a viability test for the fetus (after 26 weeks the fetus is viable), and the age of the mother is another important factor to that matter . The first major case regarding abortions was a state case, Roe V. Wade in 1973 which held that a law that’s forbid abortions is against the constitution of the U.S. later on 1992 the Planned Parenthood V. Casey the U.S SCT reaffirmed the central holding of Roe V. Wade. The meaning of that is that matters of intimate and personal choices such an abortion protected under the 14th amendment. Hand by hand and as a result of those cases, several states legislated rules and restrictions that made the abortion less accessible. In the U.S there is a formal access which those two cases paved the way, but there is less substantial accessibility which makes it harder to achieve women’s right over their bodies. One can argue that the law in the U.S makes it easier to get an abortion since the broad interpretation of the 14th amendment allows so unlike in Israel, which the state controls over the procedure. On the other hand, in the U.S, there is more reference to the fetal interests and after viability, the women cannot claim for undue burden.

Every culture believes the fetus’s right to live starts from a different point of the pregnancy or after birth, which raises the question when does the fetus has rights in terms of moral and legal perspective and when the women rights over her body wins that debate. Paternalistic approach for the women’s health or for the unborn child should not over claim the individual’s wishes.

As a woman, I cannot ignore the thought of being in this situation in the future and not being able to decide over my own body. I would like to have the choice without asking for an approval from people I do not know and who don’t share my worries or feel my pain or decision. I know this is a law paper and feelings shouldn’t get involved in my arguments, but its more on a feminist opinion that wishes to reflect on how the law and the progress sees women as a subject with rights. Raising a child should not be because I am out of options and should be taking seriously knowing that giving a life comes with duties to the child. What future would that be for a child to be raised without enough love, or to a world that forced his mother to have him only because other people thought she have to do so. As for the legal aspects, I think that a balance between the fetus’s rights to the mother’s rights needed, but until the point of viability, the choice should be very free without any state or religious intervention.

Word count: 1515