The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime, Essay Example

Personally, I am opposed to abortion. While I do agree with some moral and religious arguments against it, on a more practical level, I believe there are too many alternative options available to women today to have an abortion based on necessity or choice. I especially believe this in regards to the idea of what constitutes a human life.

There are many who might argue man-made law is subjective and passing but God’s law is free of the same thing. Legislation from states to state and nation to nation varies in regards to what prenatal stage constitutes a human life. While most faiths believe human life is created at the moment of beginning, the terms instructed by man made law change depending on the moment in time policies are drafted and the popular agreement of the time. The problem is these terms change from time to time and there is no way to, with a clear conscience, dictate that 3 prenatal month constitutes a life this decade while 4 months constituted a life a decade prior without also acknowledging innocent lives were legally taken due to old law now deemed unethical. Who is to say today’s ethical law will not become the unethical law of tomorrow?

John Donohue and Steven D. Levitt talk about information from their paper called “The Quarterly Journal of Economics” in which they make the connection between the Roe v. Wade case and crime in America. In 1972 Roe v. Wade decided that abortion was illegal. They attribute the drop in crime in 1990’s to the legalization of abortion. They argue that unwanted children born in poor situations. They argue that half of the 1990’s crime drop was a direct result of Roe v Wade. The data demonstrates that before abortion was legalized nationally in the United States it was legalized in certain states and their crime rates dropped. Of course, there are many critics of this theory, but it’s actually a valid position supported by data as John Donohue and Steven D. Levitt (16).

In my honest opinion, I actually believe this is a very strong argument in favor of abortion. The problem is that even if Levitt’s data is correct, using crime reduction as a proponent for legalized abortion lets society off the hook for providing an environment in which children born from unwanted pregnancies lack social economic support from their community to become productive citizens. This would mean passing policies permitting abortions as late as 3 months or 4 months into a pregnancy with the intention of limiting crime rates, would really be an alternative to governments allocating more funding for community resources and infrastructure that could support single parents or make adoption a viable option for those considering abortion. The argument in favor of abortion is often social conomic. Women, or couples, find themselves with a child on the way but without the income necessary or financial resources in place to take care of the child. I believe these individuals just need more financial support, this was demonstrated by Wright’s data as he revealed it would have a greater effect on the number of abortions annually if the government sought to support and strengthen low-income families and pregnant women. His data that in the 1990’s, when the U.S. economy was strong, the abortion rates fell dramatically reaffirms my belief (Wright 5).

If it is considered really undeniable that legalized abortion reduces crime rates, then it still does not justify abortion. It just makes it apparent that policies need to be put in place that are conscious of this factor and take responsibility for supporting low-income households through institutions and services capable of providing a better quality of life and development for the types of children growing in low-income environments.

While I am not in favor of abortion, I am in favor of a woman’s right to choose what she will do with her own body. This argument is especially emphasized by Hord in her essay, “Making Safe Abortion Accessible: a Practical Guide for Advocates”, in where she argued that in addition to their right to life and health, women also had the right to control their own bodies and express their own sexuality.  I do agree with Hord that taking this right away from women would be unconstitutional, but reasons should be set in place for them to choose against abortion and institutions should be empowered to help women to make a pro-life decision. This will ultimately result in the reduction of abortions as Wright demonstrated with his research.

In sum, while the issue of abortion and of a woman’s rights makes reproductive health choices one of the most debated questions in America today, the fact that public opinion concerning abortion is constantly changing puts the public and government in a position where they can’t be consistent with a vital decision that directly impacts lives. This is due to the influence of politics, religious groups and non-profit social organizations. In addition, the generalization of the national debate on abortion puts one side against the next with no real access to information, only putting fire on the debate and forcing individuals to develop and emotional attachment to the issue beyond practical reason. This was shown with Hinman and the use of labels like “pro-life” (with) and “prochoice” (against), and how they ultimately divide the parties debating the issue into two camps with no room for broad understanding of all the real issues at hand. I think the real solution to assist with the issues facing that debating abortion is for institutions to be established, both public and private sector that can provide much needed alternatives to individuals considering abortion. The debate over whether a fetus should or should not have rights, in my opinion must be taken off the table as it crosses the line between man made law and God’s law. The separation of church and state does not allow for this type influence within case law, and using God as a reason to influence the rights of individuals has its own issues associated with it, which largely attributes to why the debate over abortion has been such a hot button issue since Roe v Wade. In closing, I think abortion is unethical and that there are too many contraceptive choices for a woman to have to have an abortion in this modern age. I think that laws should side with protecting the fetus. Abortion shouldn’t used because a woman has the choice to be on birth control or to take the morning after pill. Laws protecting the fetus should be in place and there should also be laws educating women on how to manage not getting pregnant in the first place if that’s what they want. After someone is pregnant there should be no choice about the matter. Having a child live is always the right choice.

Works Cited

Donohue, John, and Steven D. Levitt. “The impact of legalized abortion on crime.”Quarterly Journal of Economics 116.2 (2001).

Hord, C.  “Making Safe Abortion Accessible: A Practical Guide for Advocates” Ipas publication. 2001. Web.

Wright, J. “Reducing Abortion in America: Beyond Roe v. Wade” 2008. Web.