Jackson Hull
Jake Schwaller
English 101-17
25 October 2012
Abortion: The True Story Abortion!!! These days it’s one of the most contentious topics around, especially with the 2012 presidential election and women’s rights all being affected by it. One of the most notable happenings in the world of abortion politics would be the new law in Arizona that outlaws abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, this law was put in place due to studies cited by many pro-life politicians that indicates that the fetus is able to feel pain after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
Glenn Cohen is a writer for the Washington post and a pro-choice supporter. In a recent article, “The Flawed Basis Behind Fetal Pain Abortion Laws” Cohen wrote in opposition to the recent laws that were enacted in Arizona. While Cohen inherently claims that fetuses are unable to experience pain after 20 weeks of pregnancy, I believe the fetus is developed enough to feel pain. In his article Cohen is avidly pro-choice and very against the new Arizona law. In the start of his article he describes and explains the law, which outlaws abortions after 20 weeks. Further into the article he gets into his opinion where he refers to the science of the opposition as “dubious.” He brings up that similar laws that are being purposed “pose a threat to abortion rights as we know them.” After this he describes how the Supreme Court has upheld the state’s rights to prohibit abortion in order to preserve fetal life only after the fetus is capable of surviving outside the womb. Cohen brings up the fact that most medical professionals say viability begins around 23 weeks into a pregnancy. Later in his article Cohen points out that, “Medical and psychological research shows that pain is both a physical response and an experiential one. The neural structures that a fetus would need to “experience” pain do not develop until well beyond the point at which these bills prohibit abortion. He later expresses his ideas that this fetal pain, if it does exist can be prevented by the use of an anesthetic prior to an abortion. This method has been in use by many abortion doctors in Nebraska. He later points out that the bills do not address women’s rights. He believes that women should have the choice to abort a pregnancy without intervention by the government. In his conclusion, Cohen states that, “The new laws are scientifically and legally ill-founded” and that, “federal courts should strike them down.” Through his writing, Cohen clearly states that he is against these new abortion laws and that the state needs to stay out. In his article Cohen argues some very strong points, but he fails to inform the reader of many things. Cohen states that the science behind the fetal pain finding is, “dubious science.” Cohen deliberately fails to go in-depth about this science and he clearly tries to play it down by calling it, dubious. Cohen, in no way allows the reader to make an informed decision. He also goes even further to put down these scientific findings by citing psychology, a theoretical science where all findings are essentially up for debate. How do we know for sure that a fetus can’t feel pain after 20 weeks? It’s very possible that a fetus is able to feel pain after ten weeks, it is impossible to prove that there is no pain. He further hinders his argument by stating later that, if the pain does exist we can pretty much just use an anesthetic to numb the pain. He admits defeat through this by saying, let’s just put the fetus to sleep before we kill it. In my opinion, Cohen’s Anesthetic argument is an admission of guilt. He definitely believes that there is a strong possibility for fetal pain.
Cohen’s argument is also flawed in choice of words; he decides to use many different words just trying to convey the point that his opposition is stupid, and doesn’t know what they are talking about. Clearly Cohen couldn’t find enough evidence to argue his points so he resorts to childish behavior to try to