The best instance is the Thornburg Case, which enjoys the privilege of precedence. In the case, court decided that abortions were not to be restricted. A different alternative was more effective, where women were to be informed on abortion and its repercussions, the risks involved in the procedures of inducing abortion, record keeping of all incidences of abortion and rescuing any born children that was initially intended for abortion, but is delivered live.
If the policies are to be critically analyzed, there is the realization that if parenting services are not funded, or the funds subsidized, there is great a chance of adverse effects on the women who are low-income earners, as they will get children who they cannot provide for. Those responsible for making and implementation of policies have to mind the social welfare of the women, who have no freedom and their rights are restrained in most situations. Policies have to be rational, and fair to all parties affected by the problem.
The relevant authorities should ensure sufficient funding for medic-care dealing with parenthood services and counseling of citizens, so that poor women can have access to contraceptives and counseling programs at reduced prices or totally free. This will affect the women; improve their level of literacy and awareness, which has the end, results of reduced abortion rates. For organizations that condone unnecessary abortions, the government has to provide conditional funds, and the extra funds can be used to enhance programs assisting the marginalized in the society. Instead of abortion, pregnancies that are unwanted may be avoided altogether. The medical organizations with mandate have to emphasize on prevention rather than dealing with abortion at its later stages, when the repercussions are overwhelming. In addition, if the government's intention is to reduce funds to aid abortion procedures, it shall assume responsibility to support those who underwent the problem unwillingly. For those that are privileged in the society, and the groups against abortion have to precisely understand that denying funds to the poor is more problematic, and would lead to an economic burden due to increased population (Simon, 1998).
Evaluation of the suggested policies
From the suggested policies to improve the current situations, the government plays a big role. The government is obligated with the duty to fully support welfare organizations for the marginalized in the society. The support involves allocation of resources, including monetary funding. The needs of the citizens in terms of socio-economic welfare have to be considered and prioritized even before any political interests. Two fundamental alternatives are clear in the suggestions. One, the government should support parenting programs and ensure the services get to the poor, as a measure to curb unintended pregnancies. The second alternative is that conditional abortions are to be accepted, only when the woman is in danger of losing life. This is because the child, once born, will be a burden to the society and family.
The other alternative could be that the government takes full responsibility for unintended children who are born from parents that have economic constrains. Basic needs will be offered to the parent in such situations, so that the growth of the child is not put at stake. Though the cost of spending for a good policy might be on the higher side compared to other policies, the government is supposed to ensure the best is implemented, regardless of the small differences in implementing the strategies.
Abortion is still a major problem affecting the society in a negative way. However, there is hope for better life and health, if the governments are ready to give a hand in adopting the best policies to handle the numerous cases of abortion. The marginalized and less privileged in the community have to be respected, and their rights exercised. Though it might take time, a world full of joy, without the traumatizing and discouraging procedures of abortion, is possible. Both the society and government are responsible in the plan to eradicate abortion.
Djerassi, C. (1986). Abortion in the United States: Political or Policy? Bulleting of the Atomic Scientists, 42(4), 38-41.
Kimport, K., Foster, K. & Weitz, T.A. (2011). Social Sources of Women's Emotional Difficulty after Abortion: Lessons from Women's Abortion Narrative. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 43(2), 103-109.
Levine, B.P. (2004). Abortion Policies and the Economics of Fertility. Society, 41(4), 79-85.
MacNair, R. (2012 June 6). Poverty and Abortion. Retrieved from…