Adriana Smith, that’s the name of the woman who was forced to be a human incubator. In May of 2025, Smith was nine weeks pregnant when she was declared brain-dead after a medical emergency; due to Georgia’s abortion laws, Smith was put on life support to keep her organs functioning. Rather than allowing Adriana's family to grieve and let her rest in peace, these laws have dehumanized her and reduced her to nothing but a “baby-machine”.
Banning abortion is immoral and illogical, as the child’s life is not promised to be a good one, and could possibly ruin the future of the birth giver. Using religion to try to defend a “pro-life” stance is trivial, and backing up claims by calling it murder is ethically questionable.
Religion is one of the most brought up arguments when defending a pro-life stance. While it is deeply rooted within American society, with 63% of U.S. occupants being Christian as of 2024, according to the Pew Research Center, it is also infallible to use it as a defense for anti-abortion laws. One of the fundamental ideas that the Framers of the U.S. Constitution incorporated into the American government is the separation of the church and state. The First Amendment in the Bill of Rights reads that the government “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”, which is most widely interpreted as no law shall be based on religion or be intended for religious use. Consequently, using religion as the basis for anti-abortion laws is simply unconstitutional and unreasonable. Not every person in the U.S. is religious, and it would be unreasonable to force a religion-based law on someone. Although it could be argued that the majority of Americans are Christian, so why would it be bad for there to be a law that is agreeable with the majority? Well, that would be considered tyranny by majority, another idea valued by the Framers, making the religious population a faction, trampling over people’s right to religious freedom.
People in support of anti-abortion laws, or “pro-lifers”, often talk about the sanctity of life, yet not many focus on the child after birth and the consequences for the parent. One of the leading causes for abortion is financial problems; many women aren’t able to financially support themselves, and adding an infant would be considerably more difficult than it already is. A study in Indiana, done by Science Direct, a bibliographic database, included 221 participants, and it found a direct link between the people needing financial support from abortion clinics and the people who went through with the abortion. At the same time, 28% of the women weren’t able to have an abortion due to not being able to afford one. For comparison, an abortion usually costs between $500 to $1000, but a human baby costs roughly around $2000 per month, assuming that the child is at peak health. The question arises of how those people are going to afford to raise an infant. The answer is they won’t be able to. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 10 million children live in poverty, and 14 million children are food insecure. Many women seek out abortions for the reason of not wishing a life with many difficulties for their children, a life with hunger, a life with unstable income, a life with unfair opportunities. Data from Statistica, an advanced analytics software, shows that between 2021 and 2022, 41% of the women who got an abortion were at 100% of the poverty level. Yet, some people take time out of their day to stand outside of abortion clinics to shame the women, not wanting to make their lives even more challenging, as well as bring a human being into this world with the knowledge that they won’t be able to provide for that child. Oriana Bandiera, an economist with a doctorate in economics, argues that the poor “have access to fewer opportunities and only a sizeable investment can get them out of the poverty trap and onto the same trajectory as those starting out with more resources.” However, spending thousands of dollars on a baby is far from a “sizeable investment”, as well as setting the child farther away from the “trajectory " of those starting with more resources.
The most common solution offered to an unwanted child is adoption. While seeming like a good alternative, Foster Care has a history of a lack of control over the children under the system. Leading to inadequate care under foster parents and cases of neglect and abuse. According to Statistica, in 2023, the national average of cases per CPS worker was reported to be 66. The high volume of cases causes a lack of attention needed to ensure a safe environment for each child; as neglect is the top type of mistreatment in abuse cases within Foster Care, standing at a 74%. Though those are only the reported cases, as it is estimated that only one in three cases is reported. The uncertainty of the Foster Care System leads many women to abortion, as the chance of another human being abused is too great a burden to bear.
In chapter 22 of Catcher in the Rye, Holden describes his fantasy of having to catch little kids “if they start to go over the cliff–[and] if they’re running and they don’t look where they’re going [he has] to come out from somewhere and catch them.” (191). This shows Holden’s desire to protect the innocence of kids and save them from the corruption and despair that come with the real world. Although in modern times, many kids don’t get the time of innocence, and rather are forced to grow up fast due to the circumstances they were born into. So in some ways, abortion could be seen as catching those little kids before they have the chance to see the real world and get corrupted.
The basis for any anti-abortion argument is to claim that it is murder, arguing that life starts at conception. In the fall of 1971, Judith Thompson, a professor at MIT teaching moral philosophy, wrote an essay, “In Defense of Abortion.” Which is exactly what the name describes, a defense of abortion. Thompson doesn’t deny the fact that a fetus is a person, but rather questions its right to use the woman’s body. One of the core ideas of the essay is a woman’s right to bodily autonomy, and her right to her own body can outweigh the fetus’s. She presents this through a thought experiment, describing a scenario where you wake up connected to a famous unconscious violinist through your kidneys. If you do not stay connected to him at all times for the next nine months, he will die. The scenario is a clear parallel to pregnancy, comparing the fetus’s life depending on the woman completely for nine months. Thompson states that “to unplug you would be to kill him”. She argues that you aren’t morally obligated to stay connected to the violinist even if the disconnection causes the violinist to die. Judith’s main argument is that the fetus doesn’t have the right to use someone else’s body to live off of unless that right is given to them by the person carrying them.
Due to abortion no longer being seen as a healthcare issue but rather as a political issue, multiple groups are trying to help women around the world get the aid they deserve. The Center for Reproductive Rights is an organization that is fighting for a woman’s freedom in abortion. Some of the things that they offer on their website are a myriad of different events around America to support women and to speak out against the abortion bans. They also offer a petition for a federal law to pass abortion rights.
Some of the things that I, personally, can do are make a call to one of Maine’s Congressmen, urging them to vote against any abortion restricting laws. As well as sign a petition for a federal abortion rights law, for there to be abortion rights all over America. If enough people join the cause and speak out about the unfair treatment of women when it comes to reproductive rights, then the government would have to listen and change its policies.
I urge you to do the same and stand up and support any woman struggling with getting an abortion and confront anyone who is shaming women for choosing their own lives over the promise of another.
As Robert Frost once said, “The best way out is always through”. Which should encourage people to not walk around the issue of reproductive rights, but rather “through” it. To speak out about the unfair treatment of women in American politics and not settle for less.