Abortion can also be anti-female, especially in Asian countries such as India and China where boys are preferable to girls. This is especially evident in China, where abortion is used as part of the Communist Party’s totalitarian power over every area of their citizens’ lives. The one-child policy was introduced in the 70s to control overpopulation, and it resulted in forced abortions and invasive monitoring of women’s menstrual cycles. Sons are seen as having more cultural worth, so many girls are aborted or abandoned if the abortion goes wrong – 95% of children in state care are girls. The policy undermines the basic human right to a family. This horrific practice violates the rights of both mother and child.
Finally, abortion discriminates against the disabled. The term used for severely disabled babies is ‘incompatible with life.’ Many mothers of disabled children find this grossly offensive. Derbhille McGill was told to abort her daughter Cloadagh, who had Edward’s syndrome, but she refused and cherished the 33 days her daughter lived. It’s not just physical disabilities, either. In England, 92% of Down’s Syndrome babies are killed despite being able to live well into adulthood. How can our society claim to be accommodating of disability while permitting such eugenic abortion?
On the other hand, many would see abortion as either a necessary evil or a force for good. Abortion is a form of female emancipation and sexual freedom. No longer are women fated to spend their lives raising children; they have a choice in the matter. Amnesty International believes that abortion is a fundamental human right for the mother, especially if she was raped. They class forcing a woman to give birth against her will as torture. A case that had a great impact on the abortion debate was the death of Savita Halappanavar in the Republic of Ireland in a Catholic hospital. Savita's family said she asked several times for her pregnancy to be terminated because she had severe back pain and was miscarrying, but she was refused. However, a report produced a year after the case revealed the standard of care Savita received was so poor (missing obvious symptoms of infection and subsequent misdiagnosis) that she would have died, abortion or no abortion.
Even some Christians would permit abortion in certain cases, such as the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice: “We call on the government to partner with us in ensuring all women have equal access to safe, legal and moral abortion care.” They believe that the Bible never explicitly condemns abortion and that a woman has the God-given right to decide how many children she wants. To quote Majorie Signer, “as moral agents, women have the God-given obligation to make decisions about the course of action that seems most responsible in cases of unwelcome pregnancy.”
To conclude, there may be some merit in allowing abortion in exceptional cases. However, abortion on demand is a slippery slope that could lead to society to view an unborn child as little more than a parasite. In any case, the child is unable to speak out and the mother may feel forced into getting an abortion against her wishes. This violates the rights of both mother and child.