Roe v. Wade

Roe v. Wade was a United States Supreme Court case. The outcome of the case gave legal definitions to things such a viability of a fetus, and set many regulations involving abortion.

Asked in Sandra Day O'Connor, Roe v. Wade

What was Sandra Day O'Connor's objection to Roe v Wade?

User Avatar
Answer Sandra Day O'Connor wasn't a member of the US Supreme Court when Roe v. Wade, (1973) was heard; President Reagan appointed her to the Court in 1981. Any discussion of Roe v. Wade requires mentioning Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's plurality/majority opinion from Casey v. Planned Parenthood, 505 U.S. 833, 112 S.Ct. 2791 U.S.Pa., 1992. This may come as a surprise to most, but Roe v. Wade does not reflect the current state of the law regarding abortion. What someone else may tell you notwithstanding, Roe is little more than an easily remembered symbol. The US Supreme Court has decided many abortion cases since Roe, some of which significantly affected Roe. Of those cases, Casey had the greatest affect. Casey actually modified Roe in the following ways: The idea that the right elucidated in Roe emanated from the Constitution was affirmed, but not enthusiastically. Instead, Justice O'Connor stated that the judicial doctrine of stare decisis required reaffirmation of Roe's essential holding; that a woman's right to choose an abortion before the fetus becomes viable overrides the state's opposing interest in protecting a potential life. The bright line trimester approach of Roe was rejected due to the fact that the state of medical science is not static. [Casey reduced the legal age of viability from 24 to 22 weeks.] In its place, Justice O'Connor specified that if the state regulation did not impose an "undue burden" on a woman's right to choose an abortion, the law would not be struck down. In other words, before a state law regulating an abortion procedure would be struck down as unconstitutional, it would have to impose a substantial obstacle to the woman's effective right to elect the procedure. Since Casey, the US Supreme Court weakened Roe even further when it refused to find the 2003 ban on the so called "partial-birth abortion" unconstitutional. Gonzales v Carhart, 550 U.S. 124, 127 S.Ct 1610 U.S., 2007. Before Gonzales, it was generally accepted that any regulation that prohibits an abortion procedure after the fetus has become viable will be deemed unconstitutional unless it contains an exception to protect the life or the health of the mother. By refusing to find the 2003 ban on "partial-birth abortion" unconstitutional, the majority in Gonzales rejected the necessity of requiring any post viability prohibition of an abortion procedure contain an exception for the life or the health of the mother.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What was the US Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade about?

User Avatar
Roe v. Wade, (1973), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case establishing that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional right to privacy, overturning all state laws outlawing or restricting abortion. It is one of the most controversial decisions in U.S. Supreme Court history. The decision in Roe v. Wade prompted a decades-long national debate over whether terminating pregnancies should be legal (or more precisely, whether a state can deem the act illegal if it chooses to do so); the role of the Supreme Court in constitutional adjudication; and the role of religious views in the political sphere. Roe v. Wade became one of the most politically significant Supreme Court decisions in history, reshaping national politics, dividing the nation into "pro-choice" and "pro-life" camps, and inspiring grassroots activism. Opposition to Roe comes primarily from those who viewed the Court's decision as illegitimate for straying too far from the text and history of the Constitution, and those possessing beliefs about the personhood of fetal human life. Support for Roe comes from those who view the decision as necessary to preserve women's equality and personal freedom, and those who believe in the privacy of individual over collective rights, although the opposition to Roe often reference the privacy of the individual when referring to the unborn child. Also law enforcement and health care professionals supported legalizing abortions because before Roe v. Wade, illegal abortions were the number one cause of preventable deaths for women of childbearing age. Workers were tired of scraping dead teenagers off back alleys who tried to get abortions from irreputable sources, and health care workers saw countless women die trying to get what could be a safe and legal procedure. Answer Roe (the legal pseudonym used by a pregnant single woman) was a single woman who wanted to get an abortion in the state of Texas in 1971, but couldn't because the procedure was illegal. Roe v. Wade centrally held that a mother may abort her pregnancy for any reason, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes 'viable.'" The Court defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks." The age of viability is currently 24 weeks, approximately six months. Answer Any discussion of Roe v. Wade requires mentioning Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's plurality/majority opinion from Casey v. Planned Parenthood, 505 U.S. 833, 112 S.Ct. 2791 U.S.Pa., 1992. This may come as a surprise to most, but Roe v. Wade does not reflect the current state of the law regarding abortion. What someone else may tell you notwithstanding, Roe is little more than an easily remembered symbol. Of the many abortion cases the US Supreme Court has decided since Roe, some have significantly altered the legal relevance of Roe. Of those cases, Casey had the greatest affect. Casey actually modified Roe in the following ways: The idea that the right elucidated in Roe emanated from the Constitution was affirmed, but not enthusiastically. Instead, Justice O'Connor stated that the judicial doctrine of stare decisis required reaffirmation of Roe's essential holding; that a woman's right to choose an abortion before the fetus becomes viable overrides the state's opposing interest in protecting a potential life. While this may sound obvious, as it is an accurate and concise restatement of Roe, it led to increased tension among those who follow Roe. For the first time the high court explicitly voiced the idea that Roe turned on the balancing of competing interests. In so doing, the court explicitly recognized that the state had a reasonable and legitimate interest in protecting a potential life. The bright line trimester approach of Roe was rejected due to the fact that the state of medical science is not static. [Casey reduced the legal age of viability from 24 to 22 weeks.] In its place, Justice O'Connor specified that if the state regulation did not impose an "undue burden" on a woman's right to choose an abortion, the law would not be struck down. In other words, before a state law regulating an abortion procedure would be struck down as unconstitutional, it would have to impose a substantial obstacle to the woman's effective right to elect the procedure. Since Casey, the US Supreme Court weakened Roe even further when it refused to find the 2003 ban on so called "partial-birth abortion" unconstitutional. Gonzales v Carhart, 550 U.S. 124, 127 S.Ct 1610 U.S., 2007. Before Gonzales, it was generally accepted that any regulation that prohibits an abortion procedure after the fetus has become viable will be deemed unconstitutional unless it contains an exception to protect the life or the health of the mother. By refusing to find the 2003 ban on "partial-birth abortion" unconstitutional, the majority in Gonzales rejected the necessity of requiring any post viability prohibition of an abortion procedure contain an exception for the life or the health of the mother. Case Citation: Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) For more information, see Related Questions, below. am i wrong or nah Roe v. Wade was a court case defending a woman's rights to abortion.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

Which constitutional amendment was used to support the decision in Roe v Wade?

User Avatar
The 7-2 decision in Roe, which challenged a Texas law anti-abortion law, overturned statutes that prohibited abortion in 46 states (the procedure was legal in four). The ruling was based on the right to privacy, which was extrapolated from language in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The "privacy" precedent was set earlier in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965), which nullified laws restricting married couples' right to be counseled about the use of contraceptives. A closer 5-4 decision from the conservative Rehnquist Court upheld Roe in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 US 833 (1992), and again used the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause to remove undue burdens from state abortion laws that were designed to restrict access to abortion without overtly prohibiting it. It is interesting to note that the Court used the same constitutional provision in Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 US 914 (2000) to declare constitutional the Nebraska ban on partial birth abortion, a procedure sometimes used in later term abortions (over 20 weeks). In 2007, the Roberts Court upheld a similar federal law, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, that was written subsequent to the 2000 ruling in Stenberg. The justices based their ruling in Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 US 124 (2007), on the strength of Congressional legislation (18 USC 1531) and precedent set in Stenberg v. Carhart. Case Citation: Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What was the supreme courts decision in the roe v Wade case?

User Avatar
In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade that women do have the right to choose an abortion during the first three months of pregnancy.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What impact did the ruling of Roe v. Wade have on society?

User Avatar
Direct Answer: This controversial ruling struck down many of the legal restrictions that were (at that time) in place against abortion. It is hard to estimate the impact of the ruling itself, since it was tied in with a number of much broader movements: the sexual revolution, women's rights movement, feminism, and civil rights more generally. However, for a period of perhaps 100 years prior - beginning in the late 19th century and ending with RvW - abortion was a felony in most states in the US, punishable by fine or imprisonment. This meant that women who became pregnant were legally obligated to bring the child to term regardless of the conditions of their life or how they came to be pregnant. The only exceptions were for imminent risk to the woman's life. Abortions were still carried out despite the legal restrictions, but (because of the risks to those doing the abortions, who could also be jailed), abortions were often done secretively and without proper medical procedures. This carried an unfortunately high rate of medical problems, either from the treatment itself or from post-treatment infection, which could sometimes lead to permanent reproductive damage or even death. Some have connected abortion with increases in sexual promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases, and other social ills, though this is probably a function of the sexual revolution more generally, which legitimized non-marital sexuality and created an open environment for discussions and depictions of sexuality in media (such as advertising and entertainment). Frankly, the risk of pregnancy (despite what people may say) has never been much of a deterrent to sexual activity in people of any age. The debate over abortion has become a significant cultural phenomenon in its own right, with an impact on election campaigns and public policy nationwide, though it has generally focused on the question of rights (the rights of the mother against the rights of an unborn child) rather than on questions of sexuality. Moral considerations: The right to an abortion was seen as one of the lynch-pins of the women's rights movement not because abortion was needed as a form of contraception - there were many contraceptives available at the time, as there are today - but because abortion was seen as a necessary 'last-ditch' safeguard against a woman being forced to have a child against her will. Contraceptives might fail or be sabotaged, sexual intercourse might be forced, living conditions might make raising a child an untenable burden; all of these cases can result in a woman being reduced (to use the feminist's terminology) to a form of chattel slavery, in which she must dedicate her life to caring for a child she neither asked for nor wanted. The moral/ethical conflict, thus, lies between the inherent right any individual has to be free (which is well-established in moral and legal codes) and the right of an unborn individual to live (highly contentious uncharted territory, since the various religious and medical opinions can not agree at what point an unborn child becomes a living being). The most conservative opinions hold that a child becomes a living being at conception (which would make any abortion a form of murder); more common opinions believe fetuses become living beings when they begin to move (usually at the end of the first trimester, which is what current law and practice use); some religious beliefs go so far as to hold that a child is not a living being until it draws its first breath (which is the standard that most US courts use to distinguish between the crime of late-term abortion and the much more serious crime of infanticide, in cases where newborns are found dead).
Asked in Roe v. Wade

Did Planned Parenthood v Casey overturn Roe v Wade?

User Avatar
No, the Court reaffirmed Roe but rejected the rigid Trimester Rule outlined in that decision, and allowed certain minor regulations the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania imposed on women seeking abortions and the facilities that provided them. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, (1992) the Supreme Court upheld as constitutional many of the provisions of Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982, which set the following restrictions: Required that a woman seeking an abortion give her informed consent prior to the procedure; (upheld) Specified that she be provided with certain information at least 24 hours before the abortion is performed; (overturned) Mandated the informed consent of one parent for a minor to obtain an abortion, but provides a judicial bypass procedure; (upheld) Commanded that, unless certain exceptions apply, a married woman seeking an abortion must sign a statement indicating that she has notified her husband; (overturned) Defined a "medical emergency" that will excuse compliance with the foregoing requirements; (upheld) Imposed certain reporting requirements on facilities providing abortion services. (upheld) Of the six rules, the Supreme Court held the state had a legitimate interest in ensuring an adult woman gave informed consent; a minor had consent from at least one parent or the courts; was able to define a "medical emergency" that would allow a facility to bypass the law; and impose reporting requirements on facilities providing abortions. The court overturned as creating an undue burden and serving no legitimate purpose to the state government the requirement that a woman wait 24 hours after counseling before undergoing an abortion procedure and that she inform her husband prior to the procedure (or at all). While the Court did agree to overturn unregulated access to abortions established in Roe, the new ruling imposed very little burden on the woman, and specifically excluded regulations that would delay or prevent women from obtaining abortions as protected under the doctrine of stare decisis. Case Citation: Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)
Asked in Roe v. Wade

Why was the decision in Roe v Wade important to feminists?

User Avatar
The Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, (1973) took the right to make medical decisions away from the government (politicians) and returned it to the doctor and patient. It also established that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional right to privacy, and overturned all state laws outlawing or unduly restricting abortion. This empowered women to control reproduction after the point of conception and made abortion legal. It overturned laws banning abortion. It made abortion legal - Apex
Asked in Roe v. Wade

Why is Roe v. Wade so controversial?

User Avatar
Direct Answer This controversial ruling struck down many of the legal restrictions that were (at that time) in place against abortion. It is hard to estimate the impact of the ruling itself, since it was tied in with a number of much broader movements: the sexual revolution, women's rights movement, feminism, and civil rights more generally. However, for a period of perhaps 100 years prior - beginning in the late 19th century and ending with RvW - abortion was a felony in most states in the US, punishable by fine or imprisonment. This meant that women who became pregnant were legally obligated to bring the child to term regardless of the conditions of their life or how they came to be pregnant. The only exceptions were for imminent risk to the woman's life. Abortions were still carried out despite the legal restrictions, but (because of the risks to those doing the abortions, who could also be jailed), abortions were often done secretively and without proper medical procedures. This carried an unfortunately high rate of medical problems, either from the treatment itself or from post-treatment infection, which could sometimes lead to permanent reproductive damage or even death. Some have connected abortion with increases in sexual promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases, and other social ills, though this is probably a function of the sexual revolution more generally, which legitimized non-marital sexuality and created an open environment for discussions and depictions of sexuality in media (such as advertising and entertainment). Frankly, the risk of pregnancy (despite what people may say) has never been much of a deterrent to sexual activity in people of any age. The debate over abortion has become a significant cultural phenomenon in its own right, with an impact on election campaigns and public policy nationwide, though it has generally focused on the question of rights (the rights of the mother against the rights of an unborn child) rather than on questions of sexuality. Moral considerations The right to an abortion was seen as one of the lynch-pins of the women's rights movement not because abortion was needed as a form of contraception - there were many contraceptives available at the time, as there are today - but because abortion was seen as a necessary 'last-ditch' safeguard against a woman being forced to have a child against her will. Contraceptives might fail or be sabotaged, sexual intercourse might be forced, living conditions might make raising a child an untenable burden; all of these cases can result in a woman being reduced (to use the feminist's terminology) to a form of chattel slavery, in which she must dedicate her life to caring for a child she neither asked for nor wanted. The moral/ethical conflict, thus, lies between the inherent right any individual has to be free (which is well-established in moral and legal codes) and the right of an unborn individual to live (highly contentious uncharted territory, since the various religious and medical opinions can not agree at what point an unborn child becomes a living being). The most conservative opinions hold that a child becomes a living being at conception (which would make any abortion a form of murder); more common opinions believe fetuses become living beings when they begin to move (usually at the end of the first trimester, which is what current law and practice use); some religious beliefs go so far as to hold that a child is not a living being until it draws its first breath (which is the standard that most US courts use to distinguish between the crime of late-term abortion and the much more serious crime of infanticide, in cases where newborns are found dead).
Asked in Roe v. Wade

How many babies have been aborted in America since Roe v. Wade?

User Avatar
Abortion statistics are never specific, as the procedure is protected under the right to privacy laws. However, it has been estimated that 3,000 are done daily. If you multiply that by the number of years that aborion has been legal, you get a large number. If you're curious, I guess you could multiply 3,000 x (years abortions has been legal) x 365 (to show the daysin those years) + 3,000 x a few days (for Leap Days). If you're not satisfied with this answer (I'm not), check this out. The Alan Gutmacher Institute, a leading proponent of abortion on demand, claims that there have been more than 50 million abortions in the U.S. since Roe Vs. Wade.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What year did the US Supreme Court decide Roe v Wade?

User Avatar
The Supreme Court decided the case on January 22, 1973. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) was a landmark United States Supreme Court case establishing that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional right to privacy, overturning all state laws outlawing or restricting abortion. It is one of the most controversial decisions in U.S. Supreme Court history. Argued December 13, 1971 Reargued October 11, 1972 Decided January 22, 1973
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What did the supreme court decide in the case Roe v wade?

User Avatar
The court assured the right to a legal abortion.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

Who was the US President when Roe v. Wade was decided?

User Avatar
The President in office at the time the US Supreme Court made abortion legal in Roe v. Wade, (1973), was Richard Nixon. President Nixon had nothing to do with the decision, so it's unreasonable to suggest that he "made abortion legal." There was nothing he could do to prevent the decision. Nixon was in office from 1968 until his resignation in 1974.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What Texas laws were challenged in Roe v. Wade?

User Avatar
The main issue in "Roe V. Wade" is whether Articles 1191, 1192, 1193, 1194, and 1196 of the Texas Penal Code ( the Texas Abortion Laws) deprive married couples and single women of the right to choose whether to have children, a privacy issued protected by the 14th Amendment. Or, Does the Texas law which makes it a crime to perform an abortion unless it is "necessary" to save the life of the mother violate the Constitution?
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What was the US Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade?

User Avatar
Roe v. Wade, (1973), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case establishing that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional right to privacy, and overturning all state laws outlawing or unduly restricting abortion. It is one of the most controversial decisions in US Supreme Court history. More Information The Texas law that was challenged (and struck down) in Roe v. Wade criminalized abortion in all cases except where it was a life-saving procedure. The United States Supreme Court found that such a restrictive statute violated the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause and that states could exercise varying degrees of discretion in regulating abortion, depending upon the stage of pregnancy. The Court also held the law violated the liberty right to privacy under substantive due process, based on the precedent set in Griswold v. Connecticut, (1965). Privacy rights are inferred from the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth and Ninth Amendments. During approximately the first trimester, states could not limit the right to abortion--that was to be left to the "medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician." From the end of the first trimester to viability, the state could "regulate abortion in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health". After viability, the state could regulate--or even prohibit--abortion except where necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother. It is important to note, however, that the Supreme Court ruling only placed a limit upon the regulations a state could impose--it did not impose any regulations itself. If Roe v. Wade were reversed, it wouldn't mean that abortion was illegal--it would mean that if states so chose, they could MAKE abortion illegal. Case Citation: Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What is the subject of Roe V. wade and what was the supreme court's decision?

User Avatar
The Subject of the case of Roe V. Wade was the legality of abortion, and the decision was to legalize it and enforce certain laws and restrictions about it. This causes great debates amongst everyone in the debate between Pro-Life and Pro-Choice.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

How can Roe v. Wade be reversed?

User Avatar
There are three ways Roe v. Wade, (1973) can be overturned: Since Roe vs. Wade was a Supreme Court decision, the Supreme Court can effectively overturn the decision by ruling against abortion in a future case. Congress can pass legislation protecting the fetus from the moment of conception (There are usually several bills addressing this issue in committee during each Congressional term. The 111th Congress (current) includes three House Resolutions and one Senate bill.). Congress and the states can amend the Constitution to include the definition of "person" to include the unborn (this is the least likely scenario).
Asked in Roe v. Wade

Who are 'Roe' and 'Wade' in the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade?

User Avatar
"Roe" was Norma McCorvey. "Wade" was the DA of Dallas County, Texas. Roe is often used in the same way as Doe, as in John Doe, in lawsuits when the individuals identity is to be protected from the media. For some reason after Doe, the next named used is Roe. ROE ET AL. v. WADE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF DALLAS COUNTY is the longer title. The case in the Texas court was named Jane ROE, Plaintiff, v. Henry WADE, Defendant, v. James Hubert HALLFORD, M.D., Intervenor. John DOE and Mary Doe, Plaintiffs, v. Henry WADE, Defendant.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

Could Congress and a conservative President overturn Roe v Wade?

User Avatar
No, they couldn't overturn it; they could write new legislation (as they've been trying to do for years) that circumvented the decision or rendered it moot, however. For example, every year someone in Congress introduces legislation designed to give constitutional rights to fetuses beginning at the moment of conception. If a fetus had rights, states could quickly pass laws prohibiting abortions to protect the fetus' constitutional rights. Some states already have triggers in place that would outlaw abortion within 90 days of such legislation passing Congress. The problem with a President and Congress attempting to enact anti-abortion legislation is the same problem we see with any controversial bill: The bill could be referred to committee and killed (which is what usually happens); it could be filibustered by opponents; Senators and Representatives would endure an onslaught of public pressure accompanied by fear of defeat in the next election (statistically, the majority of voters are still pro-choice); therefore, it may not find sufficient support to pass an up-or-down vote; it would require a sympathetic (probably lame duck) President to avoid veto; a veto would require a two-thirds override from both the House and Senate, a situation almost impossible to imagine (at least at the moment). If (big if) Congress somehow managed to criminalize abortion, it would immediately be challenged in a District Court of a pro-choice Circuit, which would result in a temporary injunction against the law until the Supreme Court determined it was constitutional. If the Supreme Court determined the law was unconstitutional, the new law would immediately be nullified. Anti-abortion legislation is the dream of many Americans, but the likelihood of it ever coming to fruition is very small as long as we have an active two-party (or more) legislature and vocal opposition among the electorate.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What happened to the Roe v. Wade baby?

User Avatar
Jane Roe, whose real name is Norma McCorvey, gave birth to a daughter in June 1970, several months after the case was initiated. By the time Roe v. Wade reached the US Supreme Court, the child was almost three years old and living with an anonymous adoptive family. McCorvey had three children. The first, by her husband Woody McCorvey, was allegedly kidnapped, then later adopted, by Norma's mother when Norma confessed her sexual orientation was either bi- or lesbian. She got pregnant with a second child sometime in 1965. The child was adopted by the baby's father under the condition that McCorvey never attempt contact. The Roe baby was the result of her third pregnancy, and was placed for private adoption. McCorvey, who was homeless and living on the street during her pregnancy, says she lent her name to the case because her circumstances fit a profile the pro-choice lawyers felt was compelling. She claims they approached her about challenging the Texas anti-abortion laws; she didn't contact them. McCorvey said she really had nothing to do with the case: never testified, never appeared in court, and only learned of the Supreme Court ruling sometime after-the-fact. McCorvey was, however, pro-choice until she converted to Christianity, and was later baptized Catholic. She says she has been "100% pro-life" since August 8, 1995. Norma McCorvey was arrested in May 2009 at a Notre Dame pro-life rally protesting President Obama's visit to the University. Case Citation: Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)
Asked in Roe v. Wade

When did Norma McCorvey give birth to the child battled over during Roe v Wade?

User Avatar
Norma McCorvery did give birth to the child when she was in court. She gave up the baby for adoption. She gave birth to a girl in 1965 & the baby was adopted by her mother. ***UPDATED ANSWER*** While Norma MCorvey did give birth in 1965, this was not the child that was the center of the case; Roe v. Wade. The case of Roe v. Wade was not brought forth in the state of Texas until 1970 and was not decided in the United States Supreme Court untl 1973. The child that Ms. McCorvey gave birth to in 1965 was the first of her three children. She was pregnant three times and gave birth all three times, never having received and abortion. All three of her children were given up for adoption. The first child was adopted by Ms. McCorvey's mother. Her second child was adopted by the child's father and Norma agreed to never have contact with the child. The third child, the one at the center of "Roe" was born in June 1970 and was also given up or adoption.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

Why is Roe v. Wade so controversial xy?

User Avatar
Direct Answer This controversial ruling struck down many of the legal restrictions that were (at that time) in place against abortion. It is hard to estimate the impact of the ruling itself, since it was tied in with a number of much broader movements: the sexual revolution, women's rights movement, feminism, and civil rights more generally. However, for a period of perhaps 100 years prior - beginning in the late 19th century and ending with RvW - abortion was a felony in most states in the US, punishable by fine or imprisonment. This meant that women who became pregnant were legally obligated to bring the child to term regardless of the conditions of their life or how they came to be pregnant. The only exceptions were for imminent risk to the woman's life. Abortions were still carried out despite the legal restrictions, but (because of the risks to those doing the abortions, who could also be jailed), abortions were often done secretively and without proper medical procedures. This carried an unfortunately high rate of medical problems, either from the treatment itself or from post-treatment infection, which could sometimes lead to permanent reproductive damage or even death. Some have connected abortion with increases in sexual promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases, and other social ills, though this is probably a function of the sexual revolution more generally, which legitimized non-marital sexuality and created an open environment for discussions and depictions of sexuality in media (such as advertising and entertainment). Frankly, the risk of pregnancy (despite what people may say) has never been much of a deterrent to sexual activity in people of any age. The debate over abortion has become a significant cultural phenomenon in its own right, with an impact on election campaigns and public policy nationwide, though it has generally focused on the question of rights (the rights of the mother against the rights of an unborn child) rather than on questions of sexuality. Moral considerations The right to an abortion was seen as one of the lynch-pins of the women's rights movement not because abortion was needed as a form of contraception - there were many contraceptives available at the time, as there are today - but because abortion was seen as a necessary 'last-ditch' safeguard against a woman being forced to have a child against her will. Contraceptives might fail or be sabotaged, sexual intercourse might be forced, living conditions might make raising a child an untenable burden; all of these cases can result in a woman being reduced (to use the feminist's terminology) to a form of chattel slavery, in which she must dedicate her life to caring for a child she neither asked for nor wanted. The moral/ethical conflict, thus, lies between the inherent right any individual has to be free (which is well-established in moral and legal codes) and the right of an unborn individual to live (highly contentious uncharted territory, since the various religious and medical opinions can not agree at what point an unborn child becomes a living being). The most conservative opinions hold that a child becomes a living being at conception (which would make any abortion a form of murder); more common opinions believe fetuses become living beings when they begin to move (usually at the end of the first trimester, which is what current law and practice use); some religious beliefs go so far as to hold that a child is not a living being until it draws its first breath (which is the standard that most US courts use to distinguish between the crime of late-term abortion and the much more serious crime of infanticide, in cases where newborns are found dead).
Asked in Canada, Contract Law, Roe v. Wade

In Canada is a verbal contract legally binding?

User Avatar
Technically yes for many things, but only if can be proven to have existed in the first place. There are specific agreements that must be in writing, such as agreements to purchase or sell land, or items for longer than a year.
Asked in Roe v. Wade

What did the ruling in Roe v Wade do?

User Avatar
Roe v Wade allowed abortion through 9 months of pregnancy in most states, for the so-called health of the mother(mental, emotional, and/or physical).
Asked in Roe v. Wade

Who was Roe from Roe v Wade?

User Avatar
The plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, (1973) was identified as "Jane Roe," a common proxy for the name of someone who wishes to remain anonymous. The real plaintiff in the case was Norma McCorvey. McCorvey never had an abortion. She gave birth to a baby girl who was immediately placed for adoption. McCorvey renounced her pro-choice stance in recent years and has become a Right to Life activist. Case Citation: Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)