Antiabortion Heartbeat Bills Are Not Morally, Scientifically or Legally Sound
Antiabortion Heartbeat Bills have been increasingly gaining traction among anti-abortionists in the United States recently. These bills, also known as “fetal heartbeat” bills, are an extreme anti-abortion measure that aim to trigger a near-complete ban on abortion services. Despite their popularity, these bills are ultimately doomed to fail on all fronts – morally, scientifically, and legally.
Morality
At the most basic level, it is simply morally wrong to enforce an extreme limitation on a woman’s right to choose. Abortion is a process that involves decisions that should only be made by the woman affected, in consultation with her doctor and with the support of her family. No law should be enacted that completely takes away a woman’s power and responsibility to make such a personal, life-altering decision.
Science
Despite the claims of anti-abortion advocates, the science behind these bills is not sound. Fetal heartbeat bills are based on the premise that the presence of a fetal heartbeat is a sign of life and thus precludes abortion services. In fact, this is a widely accepted but outdated notion. The presence of a fetal heartbeat does not necessarily indicate full “life” in the medical sense. Moreover, research has shown that a heartbeat is not always present in early stages of development, rendering such bills even more unscientific.
Legality
Finally, it is important to remember that fetus heartbeat bills are in direct violation of existing laws that protect a woman’s right to choose. First and foremost, the US Supreme Court has long held that a woman has a right to an abortion before viability. Fetal heartbeat bills, which take away this right, are thus unconstitutional and therefore illegal in the eyes of the US legal system.
Conclusion
Ultimately, antiabortion “heartbeat” bills are not sound in any of the three critical aspects: morality, science, and legality. Such laws are an extreme infringement on a woman’s right to choose and should not be supported or enacted. The debate concerning abortion rights has been a longstanding and often highly contentious one in American society, and the majority of Americans are well-acquainted with “heartbeat bills” – or laws that seek to limit abortions after a certain period of time in a pregnancy when fetal cardiac activity is detectable. These laws have been proposed or passed in numerous states in the U.S., and antiabortion activists have been among the biggest proponents.
The efficacy and morality of heartbeat bills is often up for debate; however, scientific evidence, legal and moral considerations all lead to the conclusion that these bills are not sound.
The medical community largely concurs that fetal cardiac activity is not a reliable indicator of the stage of a pregnancy, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has noted that “detection of a fetal heartbeat should not be used as an arbitrary timeline for limiting access to abortion.” Further, scientific studies have shown that embryo/fetal mortality is significant during the time period when heartbeat activity is typically first detected. These facts lead to the conclusion that heartbeat bills are not scientifically sound.
Additionally, moral and ethical considerations suggest a strong argument against heartbeat bills. It is difficult to create an ethical balance between a woman’s right to choose what she does with her own body versus the rights of an embryo/fetus. Heartbeat bills fail to respect the autonomy of women while ignoring the very real biological, medical complexities that accompany pregnancies.
Finally, legal arguments are largely rooted in the 1973 Supreme Court Case Roe v. Wade which determined that all laws that limit the right to abortion before fetal viability are considered unconstitutional. As heartbeat bills significantly limit a woman’s right to abortion during a time in a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, any such laws risk being struck down in a court of law.
Overall, there are ample scientific, legal and moral considerations that make it apparent that heartbeat bills are not sound. Though the debate continues, it is important to acknowledge that scientific research, medical opinion and legal precedent all point to the conclusion that abortion should remain safe and legal in the U.S.