The Abortion Debate: is government doing its part?
Victims of abortion are likely to face discrimination and stigmatization from societies they live in and somehow no one seems to look at it from this angle. Photo courtesy Thepunch.com.au
The debate as to whether conducting an abortion is a good thing or a bad thing continues indefinitely generating possibly the most divergent of opinion dichotomies of our time. Many critics argue that abortion is socially unacceptable while proponents argue that cases should be analyzed on individual basis.
This piece will allude to the documentary Abortion Diaries in seeking to establish whether government participation in promoting or inhibiting continuance of abortion is warranted.
The documentary points out that quite a number of victims of abortion regret undertaking the procedure in the first place. It advocates for the government to intervene in prosecution and conviction of individuals involved in this heinous act.
On the other hand, it digresses from the government’s role on abortion to the perspective of abortion as a social problem. The state is given the social responsibility of protecting its citizen, but policy experts warn that abortion is a family issue and should be solved at that basic social level.
The film documents a very unique opinion of the abortion debate in regard to the sociological background of the problem. It advances that there is a post-abortion syndrome, which is normally not highlighted to potential victims and critics. Victims of abortion are likely to face discrimination and stigmatization from societies they live in and somehow no one seems to look at it from this angle.
Stigmatization and intolerance from the society arise because of the conservatives’ ideals, which are shared by a majority of societal members. Thus, the documentary depicts that it is privately discussed among family members to avoiding shaming them. As a result of such, abortion comes off as a family issue rather than a government one.
Relevant public policies relating to abortion should be developed in order to avoid the increasing rate of abortion procurements mostly carried out in unsafe environments. Research and studies have shown that the increasing number of abortions are as a result of unprotected sex. However, the documentary posits its main premise on the debate between anti and pro-abortionists. Anti-abortionists say that abortion is unwanted and therefore should not be tolerated at any level.
Moral and religious doctrines decry abortion terming it as unacceptable and as an act that is in opposition to God’s commandments. Abortion is committing murder based on these two schools of thought and should not be condoned.
Questions still linger as to the justification of castigating abortion especially considering that circumstances that precipitate the act are unique to individual cases and sometimes narrowing down to the female’s unequivocal choice. It might all come down to lack of proper family values, inaccessibility of counseling services and a multitude of other unresolved causative factors.
In conclusion, it is important for the government through relevant authorities to come up with legislation to prevent abortions. Still, the underlying reasons such as rape and medical repercussions should inform the debate going forward, as to what holistic solutions can emanate from the discussions at the end of the day.
