In the newspaper article, â€œHouse Passes Partial Birth Abortion Banâ€, Jim Abrams reports on the passage of the ban on partial abortion and the controversies that this ban presents. On Thursday October 2, 2003 the House of Representatives voted, 281-142, for the ban of the procedure known as partial abortion. The banned procedure involves the termination of a pregnancy in the second or third trimester by partially delivering the fetus and then puncturing it in the skull. Doctors who perform this procedure, after itâ€™s banning, will be charged as criminals â€œsubject to up to two years in prison.â€1 The Republican led House has passed this bill annually, though vetoed twice by President Bush. The basis of this bill is on the health and ethical issues posed by partial abortion. But whether or not it is non-ethical or harmful to a womanâ€™s health it is still her choice, her right as a woman.
The issues of ethics and precautions have played a great role in the fight for womenâ€™s rights. This struggle dates back to the early years of our nation, in which women fought for a social identity. In the years since they have fought for property, say, and choice. Through years of struggle women have achieved, on some level, all of these rights. The most radical of rights was a right of choice. In the 1973 Supreme Court case, Roe vs. Wade, the court ruled abortion as a legal right of women to end their pregnancies. Abortion gave women a choice and presented them with opportunities. Now legislatures
are being proposed to make stipulations on that right and the fight for womenâ€™s rights has turned into the fight to keep their rights.
The controversy that the ban presents has to do with the health issues posed by partial abortion and the ethical views on the respect for human life, as well as womenâ€™s rights. The supporters of the ban say that the procedure is hazardous to the health of t