Public Funding of Abortion Clinic

Public funding for abortion clinics

Abortion has been a strongly debated issue all over the world with more and more people arguing for the promotion of pro-choice for its obvious advantages. However, there are also many people that feel that abortion is killing a life. The debate on public funding of abortion clinics lies behind the argument for or against abortion since the two are interrelated. Public funding of abortion clinics has many advantages which outweigh the disadvantages. It is for these advantages that it is felt that abortion clinics should be funded from public funds.

Roe v. Wade

The Roe v. Wade case of the year 1973 decriminalized abortion. This ruling came after the discoveries that even though abortion was illegal, many women who were desperate were willing to pay huge fees for their abortions even from practitioners who were untrained and unlicensed. There were many women who endured severe medical complications as a result of these abortions that were illegal which led to the Roe v. Wade decision (Roe v. Wade, 1973)

The Roe v. Wade ruling gave different guidelines for various trimesters. During the first trimester, it advocated for pro-choice. During the second trimester, abortion can be carried out to protect the mother’s life and during the last trimester, abortion is prohibited unless when it preserves the life or the health of the mother. This ruling was the beginning of the pro-choice argument giving women a right to decide whether they wanted to get an abortion or to continue the pregnancy.

The cost of abortion

The exact cost of carrying out an abortion depends greatly on several factors such as the trimester of the pregnancy, the type of facility, the physician carrying out the abortion, the type of procedure and lastly the anesthetic used. In general, women pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars for an abortion. Paying this cost has never been an issue for the middle and upper class women who are usually covered by their insurance plans. However, for the lower class women, they have to result to cheap facilities which do not observe the necessary standards.

Although the cost of abortion has only risen slightly over the years as a result of inflation, the lower class women have a greater burden on their shoulders as a result of the increasing cost of living. Therefore when it comes to the procurement of an abortion, they do not have much of a choice as to which facility or physician to choose.

Denying funding for abortion leads to an increase in the number of illegal abortions that are conducted making the women that procure these cheap abortion services endure more hidden costs in terms of the complications that ensure. There is also a social cost on the society when the women are forced to bear children against their will. They become parents who are unable to support their own children. Therefore, they try to find a way to procure the abortion in one way or another despite the cost. Since at most times, the women get the money for the abortion at a later stage in the pregnancy they usually increase their risk and their likelihood of getting more complications. For the women who are unable to get the money to pay for their abortion, they usually attempt to induce one on their own. This usually fails terribly leading to the women experiencing serious complications which often lead to death. Public funding of abortion thus creates a level of access to safe abortion for the lower class women. It also relieves the society off the costs of prenatal care and the birth of children in an unwanted pregnancy Weisberg 94()

Fairness in health care provision

Abortion services need to be seen as though they are medically required by all states. This means that the government should fund abortions despite of where they are performed whether in hospitals or clinics. This can be achieved through passing legislation to support pro-choice care for all pregnant women. Allowing abortions only in particular situations is a form of discrimination and in order to ensure that Americans have the necessary system that supports the choice of women to get an abortion, the government needs to pass legislation that funds abortion clinics. This will ensure that all women despite their social class have the right to make decisions about their childbearing and their reproductive health and not leaving this to only those who are able to afford to pay for abortion.

Shortage of abortion providers

There has been a shortage of abortion providers over the years as a result of the lack of experience in conducting abortions for doctors since despite their medical education, they are not trained on family planning an abortion which makes them unable to give patients the full range of care that they need. Data from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education reports that techniques for conducting first trimester abortions are taught to about 46% of medical doctors while only 34% take it as an elective. This leaves 7% of the doctors with no opportunity to learn how they can provide safe abortions Henshaw and Finer 20.

However, despite this education, very few doctors are learned the techniques of conducting second and third trimester abortions safely. This has led to a shortage of providers of safe abortion services all over the country thus creating a necessity for doctors to be educated on this. By providing public funding for abortion clinics, this will require institutions that train medical doctors to add mandatory programs to teach the women how to conduct safe abortions at all stages of pregnancy thus increasing the safety of abortions and decreasing the number of illegal abortions greatly.

Also there has been a pattern of decrease of the number of hospitals that provide abortion services as a result of the stigma attached to this. According to a report by the American Hospital Association, there have been serious implications of access to abortion services which have made hospitals shun away from providing these services Haney 41.

By giving public funding for abortion clinics, this will increase the number of hospitals that offer abortion services thus enabling more women to access safe abortions.

Conclusion

Many activists who are against abortion have stated that providing public funding for abortion clinics makes little fiscal sense and is immoral. However, looking at the argument of those who are pro-choice, the advantages of public funding for abortion clinics outweigh the disadvantages. Some of the advantages include increasing access to safe abortion for all women, decreasing the number of women who endure complications of unsafe abortions and giving the public a fair and equal access to abortion services. Under the ethical principle of beneficence and that of the common good, by publicly funding abortion clinics, the society in general will benefit greatly.

References

Jane Roe, Et Al. V. Henry Wade, District Attorney of Dallas County Roe v. Wade. U.S. Supreme Court 1973.

Haney, J. The Abortion Debate: Understanding the Issues. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow Pub Incorporated, 2008. Print.

Henshaw, S.K., and L.B. Finer. “The Accessibility of Abortion Services in the United States, 2001.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 35.1 (2003): 16-24. Print.

Weisberg, D.K. Family Law. New York: Aspen Pub, 2008. Print.