Dating back to 1973 with the landmark case, Roe v. Wade, which allowed women to have abortions under the right to privacy protected by the Fourteenth amendment, abortion has been a point of contention for several decades. Deemed legal to terminate a woman's pregnancy in the first trimester, the specifications have narrowed over the years and grown in complication and significance. Especially during this election year of 2016, the particular debate on the topic of abortion is kairotic. The argument continues as to whether abortion throughout fetal viability remains as a woman's right protected under the Due Process Clause or if abortion is human murder.

This topic interests me not only because I am a female and this law could potentially apply to me in the future, but also due to the social and economic welfare of the United States. Raised in a Catholic household, I would have expected my right-winged thoughts to align with my parents', which remain pro-life. Even though my opinion strays far from my family, I am confident in pro-choice decisions assisting America long term for several reasons. On a personal note, one recent morning I visited the doctor's office, where I remained in the waiting room for over half an hour observing a young girl whose stomach protruded from her body. Childishly and noisily sucking on a lollipop, like something her baby would be doing in just a few short years, she reminded me of a kid. Without a mother or any guidance in sight, I couldn't help but wonder where her baby would be five years from now. Sadly, this potential of unguarded motherhood is one of the many cases around America and is partly why I am so interested in researching abortion. After many searches on Ebsco, and other well-respected databases, I will be qualified to write about this topic.

The first article I read on CNN proposed that abortion rates would decrease, if the government ensured support for women to continue with the pregnancy. However, if the government takes action to, "support more happy and healthy childbearing, to reduce unwanted pregnancies and to alleviate the economic anxieties of mothers-to-be," there could still be debate on how to do so. (Frum, October 2012). Frum is a reliable and very knowledgeable source, considering he was a speechwriter for former president, George W. Bush, graduate from Harvard, and a prestigious interviewer and CNN contributor. However, he is a firm neoconservative, so there is bias on the political spectrum concerning abortion beliefs.

Keresztes, a woman writing for the Amherst Student page, offers a different perspective on being pro-choice, with a lighter way of viewing the harsh topic. Instead of assuming the opposite of pro-life is "pro-death," she encourages readers to consider the meaning of choice. It does not mean every pregnant woman is getting an abortion, but that one has the freedom to do so if necessary. This second article is not from an as reliable source, however the student writer brings up a great point. As Keresztes clearly has bias, labeling herself as a liberal, pro-choice advocate, I have to be meticulous when reading and differentiating the facts from the values when incorporating them into my final paper. 

From a branch of the Huffington Post, a well-known online news aggregator, a college student writes the third article I found. I am least likely to use this source, since I have no supporting information on the author's background. However, I am more likely to value Kelseigh Ingram's opinion due to her insertion of a personal anecdote. From a completely different outlook, Ingram is pro-choice for a more unique and private reason, being that she is infertile for her lifetime. When refuting pro-choice with alternative pro-life reasons, one would curb the idea of abortion by saying "give your baby up for adoption, since there are many people that yearn for one." Ingram considers this patronizing in a way to people like herself, because she does not want others to assume that it is their burdening task on their bodies and themselves to deliver the baby that she can't carry. She views it as "unfair to make someone go through a pregnancy against their will" as if it were their job to give birth for someone else's desire.

The specific research exigence of abortion is arguable because there are many different points to each side, pro-choice and pro-life. The debate remains an open question largely in spite of human morals. Since there is not necessarily a right or wrong answer, values have a substantial impact on this argument. Also, values are hard to determine ethical or not, since they are people's opinions rather than cold, hard facts. With all of the different perspectives arising in my research it is normal for opinion to fluctuate, so it is hard to remain neutral when reading new information. The agreements and disagreements in the sources are all so strong that it is makes the controversy even tenser. From trying to define the actuality of human murder to attempting to decide what is best for America's welfare; the debate could be everlasting. However, the overall outcome of this decision is vital to women and families with unwanted pregnancies, abortion clinics across the country, lawmakers, and the citizens affected by America's future welfare. If a woman does not feel comfortable and confident in bringing a child into this world, then it is questionable from the start as to whether her capabilities of motherhood are sufficient. To make my paper more concentrated; I am considering narrowing down to a certain aspect of one pro-choice reason, like the state's duty to a woman, for example, and expanding on it. 

