Research Purpose Statement/Outline
Introduction and Purpose Statement
One of the major public policy conflicts, which is particularly relevant during the ongoing pandemic, resulting in higher risks, is abortion legislation, which is to be readjusted to the current conditions. The opposing views on the matter are usually presented by the emphasis on protecting life as “basic human freedom” contrasted by the need for implementing a moral approach to the problem (Israel 2021, 1; Bhakuni and Miotto 2020). In other words, it is possible to either claim the necessity to carefully approach the issue on a case-by-case basis or rely on generalizations in restricting these interventions. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine trends in this field in terms of economy, constitutionality, and ethics in order to determine the feasibility of specific solutions at the time of the pandemic.
Policy Issue Background
Previous research on abortion policies confirms their evolution, which is accompanied by the exacerbation of conflicts. According to Israel (2021), outdated laws are currently reconsidered from the perspective of their feasibility, and the shift is presented by the attention to the protection of life rather than women’s freedom. Meanwhile, this strategic course is complemented by the focus of specialists on guaranteeing safety in abortion care (Chavkin et al. 2018). Since these contradictory initiatives are equally presented in the scholarly sources, one should consider the possibility of meeting women’s needs while satisfying all requirements of supporters of these policies and their opponents.
Constitutionality of Abortion Policies and Regulatory Measures
The regulatory measures and legislation regarding abortion are subject to the examination through the lens of their constitutionality as the primary guidance for policymakers in this area. As follows from previous studies, this aspect is challenging since preventive measures are deemed unconstitutional, whereas personal autonomy and safety of women should be emphasized as vital provisions (Undurraga 2019). Hence, from this perspective, it is impossible to ban abortion completely on the basis of criminalization regimes described by the supporters of this solution.
Ethical Considerations and Long-Term Implications
Another factor is ethical considerations and the long-term implications of both abortion policies and regulatory measures. This condition is well-studied by scholars who state that the balance between women’s sufferings and the protection of new life is conditional upon the morality of specific regions (Abu-Baker and Mrayyan 2020). In addition, the selection of one or another standpoint leads to varying outcomes, and the long-term consequences might be harmful to women’s health or the fetus. In this respect, an individualized approach would be preferable since personal conditions matter for proper judgment.
Costs and Benefits of Competing Perspectives
The competing perspectives also have different economic implications, which affect the decision-making process. According to Coast et al. (2019), they would differ depending on the level of examination, including individuals, communities, and the authorities involved in the matter. Thus, for women, accessing safe abortion services is more favorable, whereas the possibility of avoiding it correlates with the availability of contraceptive methods among them (Coast et al. 2019). For communities, the high costs of procedures would correlate with appropriate legislation, and the authorities’ actions will be guided by employment and investments in children (Coast et al. 2019). Considering these factors, regulatory measures result in greater economic burden despite being crucial for protecting new life.
Conclusion
The comparison of legislation regarding abortion with regulatory measures shows that the former’s constitutional nature is opposed to the latter’s inherent morality, which is, nevertheless, varies depending on the environment. As for the economic aspect, it contributes to the feasibility of prioritizing women’s freedom to decide when resources are scarce. It confirms the impossibility of supporting children when patients are entirely rejected in accessing abortion.
Annotated Bibliography
Abu-Baker, Rasha, and Majd T. Mrayyan. 2020. “Investigation on Abortion: Legal and Ethical Argumentations.” EurAsian Journal of Biosciences 14, no. 2: 4513-4517. EBSCOhost.
This article narrates about legal and ethical considerations applicable to abortion policies and regulations while focusing on varying perspectives of policymakers around the world. Thus, public health in this area significantly depends on the views on life and death, and morality in restricting or ensuring access to this service is formulated accordingly (Abu-Baker and Marayyan 2019). As for the legal part, it is less ambiguous as the common priority is the preservation of women’s health (Abu-Baker and Marayyan 2019). These findings are useful for the purpose of the study as they confirm the origin of claims of opponents and proponents of abortion in the sources they use as guidance. Therefore, it will be helpful for supporting the long-term nature effects of decisions in this regard and proving the need for respecting individual circumstances over generalizations. In addition, the inclusion of the cultural perceptions in analysis by the authors serves as evidence of the credibility of their conclusions and, consequently, suitability for the purposes of the current study.
Brown, Benjamin P., Luciana E. Hebert, Melissa Gilliam, and Robert Kaestner. 2020. “Association of Highly Restrictive State Abortion Policies with Abortion Rates, 2000-2014.” JAMA Network Open 3, no. 11: e2024610-e2024610. Web.
In this article, the scholars report on the correlation between restrictive measures presented by the existing legislation and lower abortion rates. Their conclusions are based on data received from numerous sources and different countries, and this circumstance makes the findings uniform in nature and applicable to any environment (Brown et al. 2020). Moreover, the information gathered over a decade increases the precision of findings, and the harm caused by this approach is clearly demonstrated as a trend rather than events of short-term nature. Hence, this source is vital for supporting the need for paying attention to long-term implications, including economic and health considerations. By incorporating it in the suggested study, one can prove that this extreme, even though it might seem feasible from the perspective of population control, violates women’s rights and freedoms. It can also be included in the section, assessing the unconstitutional nature of this measure in order to support the idea of introducing an individualized approach as opposed to generalizations of people’s conditions.
Coast, Ernestina, Samantha R. Lattof, Yana van der Meulen Rodgers, and Brittany Moore. 2019. “Economics of Abortion: A Scoping Review Protocol.” BMJ Open 9, no. 7: e029939. Web.
This publication is focused on the discussion of the economic aspect of abortion policies and additional regulations and, more specifically, the impact on individuals and entities. The multi-faceted nature of this source is also supported by the inclusion of extensive data from credible databases and the practical orientation of researchers who intend to develop frameworks for describing the combination of trends (Coast et al. 2019). Thus, for women, the implications of restrictions and other regulations are expressed by household struggles in the lack of access to contraceptive methods. For communities, the problems are caused by the increase in costs, leading to the impossibility of benefitting from abortion, which subsequently adversely affects wellbeing. As for the authorities, the economic implications of these solutions are attributed to the area of employment and the need for investing more funds in children. The inclusion of this information in the study will allow examining the costs and benefits of abortion restrictions compared to other regulations and select an appropriate method for addressing the challenge.
Erdman, Joanna N., and Brooke Ronald Johnson Jr. 2018. “Access to Knowledge and The Global Abortion Policies Database.” International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 142, no. 1: 120-124. Web.
This publication examines the ambiguity of current legislation and regulations of abortion expressed in the lack of awareness of the available options among the female population. This situation is detrimental to the quality of corresponding medical services when they are provided by healthcare facilities and, consequently, negatively affects the overall safety of women (Erdman and Johnson 2018). From this standpoint, the authors claim that legal responsibility in the case of adverse outcomes can hardly be established (Erdman and Johnson 2018). Consequently, the transparency of procedures and their circumstances can be guaranteed only when there is a single database with all vital provisions. Therefore, the article can serve as a source of information concerning the necessity to introduce regulatory measures on a state level, accompanying the relevant laws, in order to clarify the requirements. For the purposes of the suggested study, it will be advantageous for confirming the feasibility of both official policies and regulatory measures and demonstrating the respective areas of their influence.
Gaj, Eoin B., Jessica N. Sanders, and Phillip M. Singer. 2021. “State Legislation Related to Abortion Services, January 2017 to November 2020.” JAMA Internal Medicine 181, no. 5: 711-713. Web.
This article presents comprehensive information regarding the legislation related to abortion and its development from 2017 to 2020. The benefits of this publication are the incorporation of data from various sources, the focus on multiple states, and, more importantly, the claim of a constitutional nature of abortion policies (Gaj et al. 2021). According to the scholars, both restricting the service and facilitating access to it have been implemented over the years, while the regulations related to the procedure and timings are provided in all initiatives (Gaj et al. 2021). Since the article is aimed at examining the legal aspect of the matter, it will be useful for assessing the feasibility of these approaches to exercise control over abortion. In addition, it will be helpful for providing a historical overview of the issue and, consequently, presenting the dynamics of this field’s progress. The findings will allow contrasting regulations as mild measures and current solutions on the state level in order to determine an optimal course for future developments.
Hasselbacher, Lee A., Luciana E. Hebert, Yuan Liu, and Debra B. Stulberg. 2020. “My hands are tied”: Abortion Restrictions and Providers’ Experiences in Religious and Nonreligious Health Care Systems.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 52, no. 2: 107-115. Web.
In this article, the scholars write about the significance of religion for understanding the morality which should be attributed to abortion policies and regulations. According to them, Catholic healthcare facilities generally prohibit this service, whereas other beliefs might contradict their stance (Hasselbacher et al. 2020). Hence, in order to fully grasp the meaning of a religious approach to the problem and, consequently, the scope of the provided care, one should pay particular attention to this area. The conclusions, stating that this factor leads to delays and a limited number of options, contribute to the idea that ethics are subjective (Hasselbacher et al. 2020). For the purposes of the proposed study, this consideration is critical to demonstrate the importance of uniform guidelines within states and prove the difference in women’s future wellbeing. Therefore, it will be included in the section devoted to the ethical aspect of the matter to show the lack of balance in this field, which should be compensated for either legally or by introducing effective regulations.
Jones, Rachel K., Laura Lindberg, and Elizabeth Witwer. 2020. “COVID-19 Abortion Bans and Their Implications for Public Health.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 52, no. 2: 65-68.
In this article, the authors examine the nature of abortion bans during COVID-19 and state that they seem unconstitutional due to the explicit violation of fundamental human rights. The problem is connected to the fact that policymakers deliberately refer to the issues related to scarce resources of healthcare facilities to explain their actions as care for the common good (Jones et al. 2020). The situation becomes more ambiguous as the long-term implications are hard to predict during the ongoing crisis. Moreover, the lack of a uniform approach to the subject leads to the impossibility of tracing the origin of these initiatives and determining which states are currently affected by them. The consequences of illegal restrictions can be drastic, and they include financial complications for individuals and the growing burden of the clinics providing these services (Jones et al. 2020). From this point of view, it is reasonable to suggest that uniform legislation for all states is required, whereas the introduction of different regulations is detrimental to both patients and facilities. This consideration will be used for the study to support the feasibility of developing appropriate laws instead of state-based guidelines.
Lavelanet, Antonella F., Brooke Ronald Johnson Jr, and Bela Ganatra. 2020. “Global Abortion Policies Database: A Descriptive Analysis of the Regulatory and Policy Environment Related to Abortion.” Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 62: 25-35. Web.
The article narrates about the abortion policies and regulations by referring to the necessity to remove restrictions. Their standpoint is supported by substantial evidence, including the statements made by the World Health Organization (Lavelanet et al. 2020). In addition, the emphasis is put on the lack of clarity in the practical implementation of these measures and their outcomes for women’s safety (Lavelanet et al. 2020). In this situation, the main problem is in the fact that the barriers existing in the countries where abortion is legal result in the absence of knowledge on how regulations modify the effects of legislation. From this perspective, the inclusion of this information in the future study is conditional upon the importance of confirming the predominant role of regulatory measures in accessing abortion care compared to laws. Since this aspect is not efficiently controlled by the authorities, it is crucial to suggest relying on legal provisions instead of single solutions to the problem in order to guarantee safety for the patients.
Spitzer, Elyssa, and Nora Ellmann. 2021. “State Abortion Legislation in 2021: A Review of Positive and Negative Actions.” Center for American Progress. Web.
This publication is devoted to examining positive and negative aspects of state abortion policies due to the growing trend of introducing new restrictions in this area. In this piece, the authors claim that the current changes are detrimental to the health status of minorities, citizens’ incomes, and the people who already suffer from the existing barriers (Spitzer and Ellmann 2021). In this situation, the risks are related to the increased probability of violating the Constitution while attempting to modify previous legal instruments based on it (Spitzer and Ellmann 2021). Meanwhile, the decisions made in different states might contradict the official policies, which makes them critical for the safety of abortion care. Therefore, regulatory measures seem critical for protecting women’s rights, and their significance explained by this statement should be emphasized in the future study. Hence, this source will be used to show the feasibility of including these regulations in order to resist the establishment of improper practices.
Undurraga, Verónica. 2019. “Criminalisation Under Scrutiny: How Constitutional Courts are Changing Their Narrative by Using Public Health Evidence in Abortion Cases.” Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters 27, no. 1: 41-51. Web.
The article presents comprehensive information regarding the constitutional aspects of abortion policies and accompanying regulations. According to the scholar, one of the most negative phenomena is the criminalization of this service since it does not lower abortion rates while adversely affecting the safety of this procedure and the subsequent care (Undurraga 2019). Moreover, preventive solutions are deemed to be more optimal for reaching this goal, and the constitutional rights of women should be seen as a priority in the matter (Undurraga 2019). The considerations presented in this publication are suitable for supporting the introduction of uniform laws for all states in order to respect the above needs, whereas uncontrolled regulations seem undesirable. Therefore, the use of these findings in the suggested study will be beneficial for comparing the feasibility of the two measures in varying contexts and, more importantly, demonstrating the need for aligning decisions.
References
Abu-Baker, Rasha, and Majd T. Mrayyan. 2020. “Investigation on Abortion: Legal and Ethical Argumentations.” EurAsian Journal of Biosciences 14, no. 2: 4513-4517. EBSCOhost.
Bhakuni, Himani, and Lucas Miotto. 2021. “Conscientious Objection to Abortion in the Developing World: The Correspondence Argument.” Developing World Bioethics 21, no. 2: 90-95. Web.
Brown, Benjamin P., Luciana E. Hebert, Melissa Gilliam, and Robert Kaestner. 2020. “Association of Highly Restrictive State Abortion Policies with Abortion Rates, 2000-2014.” JAMA Network Open 3, no. 11: e2024610-e2024610. Web.
Chavkin, Wendy, Bianca M. Stifani, David Bridgman‐Packer, Jamie MS Greenberg, and Mary Favier. 2018. “Implementing and Expanding Safe Abortion Care: An International Comparative Case Study of Six Countries.” International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 143: 3-11. Web.
Coast, Ernestina, Samantha R. Lattof, Yana van der Meulen Rodgers, and Brittany Moore. 2019. “Economics of Abortion: A Scoping Review Protocol.” BMJ Open 9, no. 7: e029939. Web.
Erdman, Joanna N., and Brooke Ronald Johnson Jr. 2018. “Access to Knowledge and The Global Abortion Policies Database.” International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 142, no. 1: 120-124. Web.
Gaj, Eoin B., Jessica N. Sanders, and Phillip M. Singer. 2021. “State Legislation Related to Abortion Services, January 2017 to November 2020.” JAMA Internal Medicine 181, no. 5: 711-713. Web.
Hasselbacher, Lee A., Luciana E. Hebert, Yuan Liu, and Debra B. Stulberg. 2020. “My hands are tied”: Abortion Restrictions and Providers’ Experiences in Religious and Nonreligious Health Care Systems.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 52, no. 2: 107-115. Web.
Israel, Melanie. 2021. “The Abortion Policy Landscape Is More Dynamic than Ever: What Americans Need to Know.” The Heritage Foundation 5233: 1-9. Web.
Jones, Rachel K., Laura Lindberg, and Elizabeth Witwer. 2020. “COVID-19 Abortion Bans and Their Implications for Public Health.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 52, no. 2: 65-68.
Lavelanet, Antonella F., Brooke Ronald Johnson Jr, and Bela Ganatra. 2020. “Global Abortion Policies Database: A Descriptive Analysis of the Regulatory and Policy Environment Related to Abortion.” Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 62: 25-35. Web.
Spitzer, Elyssa, and Nora Ellmann. 2021. “State Abortion Legislation in 2021: A Review of Positive and Negative Actions.” Center for American Progress. Web.
Undurraga, Verónica. 2019. “Criminalisation Under Scrutiny: How Constitutional Courts are Changing Their Narrative by Using Public Health Evidence in Abortion Cases.” Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters 27, no. 1: 41-51. Web.