Last Monday, the Supreme Court eradicated two very limiting abortion regulation laws in Texas. One of them forced every abortion clinic to have admitting privileges at hospitals within a 30-mile range. The other forced all these clinics to have ambulatory medical standards including the size of the beds, width of the hallways and other requirements.

The Federal Court considered these two rules placed an “undue burden” on a woman looking to end her pregnancy. In Contrast, Texan legislators claimed that they only wanted these clinics to have the highest of the medical standards to protect women’s health.

Abortion rights advocate at the Supreme Court, March 2, 2016, in Washington, DC. Credit: Time

“The decision erodes states’ lawmaking authority to safeguard the health and safety of women, and subjects more innocent life to being lost. Texas’ goal is to protect innocent life while ensuring the highest health and safety standards for women,” said Greg Abbott, governor of Texas.

The decision has created a wave of reactions, and there are no gray areas, people love it or hate it. Apparently, most pro-life groups have raised their voices against the decision because it makes it easier for a woman to get an abortion. Most of the times, these groups based their claims on religious beliefs, they say abortion is the murder of innocent children. However, the practice has been legal in the country since 1973 when it was federally legalized. Accordingly, the number of abortions in the United States rapidly increased, and many states took action against this.

It is a Pro-life Vs Pro-choice issue

In 1973, women-rights movements managed the federal government to listen to their pleas, and they celebrated the legalization. These groups think that every woman was the right to choose if she wants to continue with her pregnancy, hence the name Pro-choice, but it didn’t last long.

After it was deemed legal, the number of medical abortions skyrocketed, and a lot of governors starting creating regulations to reduce this number. Since the United States has an unyielding religious tradition, putting barriers between a woman and medical assisted abortion was easy.

Under the premise of protecting women health, a lot of states in North America started to put some harsh regulations including the ones ruled out by the Supreme Court. However, there are still many others that have been deemed unethical. For instance, in some states, if a woman wants to end her pregnancy, she has to enter a waiting list. This puts her life at risk because the longer she is pregnant, the more dangerous the procedure.

Once their turn is up, they have to attend classes where doctors explain them the risks and the consequences both physical and moral. Regarding the latter, it is custom for some religious organizations to gather around abortion clinics and curse at the women. There are many other barbaric practices such as showing a woman pictures of a dead fetus to dissuade her.

“This is a decisive victory for women across the country. After all the progress we have made on women’s rights, we cannot go back to the days when women in America did not have the right to control their own bodies,” said Vermont Senator, Bernie Sanders.

The court found the Texan regulations to be of no help to women

In recent years, a lot of support groups have been developed to guide women through the process. Due to the regulations on abortion clinics, it has become very difficult for a woman to have access to the service, especially considering that a lot of them want to end her pregnancy because they live in poverty. Most of the times, these women are desperate to get an abortion, and in a lot of the cases, will do it with or without medical assistance. Making it difficult for abortion clinics to operate creates a whole in the market that unregulated entities will seize.

This Monday, the Texan legislators argued that forcing these hospitals to have access to a hospital nearby, and the minimum standards only sought to protect women. Regarding the first one, the Supreme Court decided the priority was for a woman to get help, not an emergency measure. Many people argue that these kind of facilities should stand up to the same parameters as a regular hospital, and they are troubled by the Federal Court’s ruling.

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that almost 90% of these procedures occur during the first four weeks. In this cases, 85% of the doctors will practice a suction curettage, also known as aspiration abortion. This is a simple process any doctor can do in a clean and an averagely regulated environment. There are very few clinics that offer abortions after a period passes because of the complications that might present.

As a curious fact, none of the GOP candidates have issued comments on this matter. This is especially weird for Donald Trump, who is known for his excessive use of Twitter. Some say the reason might be Jason Miller. Trump hired Miller a couple of days ago. Being an experienced communication adviser, he might have persuaded the candidate to stay off social media for a while.

Besides Bernie Sanders, Democrats have been terribly silent too. Nor the President of the United States or Hillary Clinton has said anything about it.

Source: Washington Times