what is the Roe v. Wade?

Question

ive read about it in wikipeda and what not, but can some one translate it for me please?
thanx

Answer 1

I appreciate machngn's effort to be "non-political", but he is, unfortunately, mistaken on some key facts. (Actually, I think vigorous political debate is a GOOD thing, if done honestly and respectfully.)

For starters, it is NOT true that abortion was illegal across the nation before the Roe v Wade decision. On the contrary, abortion laws had for several years become increasingly lax in many states. Indeed, the restrictions were very few in states like New York and California, in which 'abortions rights' groups had been lobbying for years -- even former "life of the mother" exceptions had turned into "health" exceptions, including "mental health" which meant practically ANY woman could find a doctor who would certify that carrying the baby to term might adversely affect her "health".

Also, the claims that numerous illegal abortions were taking place in unsanitary conditions at the cost of many lives -- a major argument (the 'back alley' or 'coathanger' argument) used by the abortions rights lobbies-- were very much overstated.

In fact, former members of groups like NARAL have revealed that they simply MADE UP some of the numbers they used. (And TODAY, unfortunately, abortion providers in a number of states have fought AGAINST bills demanding stronger health standards for abortion clinics, arguing that this would 'restrict the right to abortion.)

What Roe v Wade did was to take many of the decisions about abortion restrictions OUT of the state legislatures --that is, out of the hands of the people of the individual states acting through their legislators -- and make it a JUDICIAL matter, declaring that legislatures simply COULD not pass many of these restrictions. The decision DID allow for some increase in state oversight LATER in pregnancy (esp the third trimester), but even then they could not do very much.

I can't lay out Roe v Wade's whole "trimester" setup here. But it's based on the idea that the state's legitimate interest in the nascent life is keyed to the 'viability' of the fetus outside the womb ....

One problem with this is that medical technology has since pushed that age back significantly, making the trimester-scheme itself obsolete.

Second issue is that it seems to say that rights are few if any if the lief it highly "dependent" on others to survive. Consistently applied that would mean an infant --unable to feed himself-- or disabled person would have LESS right to protection than others ?!)
___________

Perhaps the greatest irony of the decision is that when the Supreme Court "settled" Roe v Wade, by taking much out of the people's hands, they did much to make the whole debate MORE contentious, short-circuiting what was going on in the states, creating a serious roadblock to people reaching some sort of consensus through the political and legislative process.

Another oddity -- many legal scholars who LIKED the results, because they personally prefer very limited restrictions on abortions, believe that it was a very poorly reasoned decision. (These folks do not generally think it should be overturned, because they believe it should be maintained out of respect for precedent. Frankly, "precedent" itself should not be enough, not even when it's about a "big" mater. On that basis Plessy vs Ferguson ['separate but equal'] would still be standing.)

Answer 2

Okay...on a not-so-political note....
Before the Roe v Wade decision...abortion in America was illegal. This doesn't mean that abortions weren't performed...it just means that if a woman wanted the procedure done, it was performed by a "less than reputable" doctor, or a midwife...usually in less-than sanitary conditions. Many women died from infection, or bled to death as a result of a poorly performed abortion.
Roe v. Wade changed all of that...giving them the opportunity to have the procedure done in sanitary conditions by a qualified physician.
The decision has been a political hotbed since it was passed.
Many people feel that abortion is morally wrong, and that it is the murder of unborn babies. The other side of the argument says that every woman has the choice of whether or not they give birth...
Others say that abortion should only be legal in the cases of rape, incest, or if there were medical circumstances that would put the mother's life in jeopardy if she were to remain pregnant.
Roe v. Wade basically said that -no matter what argument you side with- that the choice is a moral one and not a legal one...but did impose limits on how far along a woman could be before the procedure would not be allowed.
I hope this answers your question....In a "politically neutral" way!



I would like to thank Bruhaha on straightening out some of the facts I was not aware of!
Yes...I believe honest debate is a good and healthy thing...but I sometimes question the forum that people use to further their agendas....and many people on Yahoo Answers use this as a platform to "preach" their religious or political beliefs, insomuch that they are more concerned with their "point of view" than they are with actually answering the question at hand!
The abortion debate will rage on...with each side refusing to "give an inch" for a long time. Religious fanatics bomb clinics and kill innocent victims because they believe "God is on their side"..(Just like fanatical Muslims that crash planes into buildings) and blockade the entrance to clinics, while Pro-Choice fanatics will continue to refuse any change in the legislature.
Healthy debate is one thing, fanaticism is another!

Answer 3

you're making it look like the alternative became right into a extremely undemanding one. It wasn't. a female has the amazing to privateness, so for that and a few different reasons, the appropriate court docket overruled states' regulations against abortion interior the 1st trimester. What you probably did no longer point out is that the SC weighed the privateness remember against the states' valid pastimes in regulating the prepare. They ruled that interior the 1st trimester, there is little threat to the mummy's well being and so the female has the amazing to an abortion if she chooses. interior the 2nd trimester, the risks to the female advance, and because between the valid pastimes of the states became into to guard the well being of the female, it could make abortion unlawful. interior the 0.33 trimester, there's a great threat to the female, plus the viability of the fetus turns into yet another of those valid pastimes. it fairly is why maximum if no longer all states make late-term abortions unlawful. (by using the way, viability DOES become a determining ingredient - study the SC case your self) On an factor word, your question and edits do no longer possibly factor to the credibility of your question. You declare to have an interest interior the final subject remember, yet keep speaking approximately whilst human beings initiate, viability, and medical concept time. supply up hiding at the back of words and admit which you wrote the question just to yell against abortion.

Answer 4

Roe vs. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court case that was about a woman's right to seek an abortion. The case was from Texas, and challenged a woman's right to have an abortion, by willful consent rather than on doctors advice to save the life of the mother. You see, in Texas, as in most other states, abortion was illegal except in cases where the mother would die because of extreme medical complications.
Ms. Roe, a single, pregnant woman brought the case because she did want a child and Texas laws would have made her a criminal for even seeking to have an abortion, never mind getting it done.
Taking the case all the way to the Supreme Court, Federal Supreme Court that is, she eventually won. It was her contention that women ought to have the right to decide for themselves, and that the government should not decide for them, nor make it a criminal offense to seek out and obtain an abortion.

Answer 5

Roe v. Wade was the legal battle which went to the Supreme Court which legalized abortion (boo). Unfortunately, the Supreme Court exersised authority which does not traditionally lie with them. That highlights the problem with the judicial system at the moment...The balance of powers has been thrown off...

--edit-- Btw, the Ms. Roe later regreted procuring the abortion.