Abortion and Public policy-making

Published: 2019-06-25 21:44:10
1456 words
5 pages
13 min to read
letter-mark
B
letter
University/College: 
Type of paper: 
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Abortion is one main issue that has caused a lot of controversy in the eyes of the public. According to National Abortion Federation, it is the act of taking medications to terminate a pregnancy. Alternatively, it is the ending of a pregnancy by emptying the uterus in a surgical procedure. In other quarters, such as the National Right to Life Organization, abortion is the premature expulsion of the human fetus through miscarriage, naturally or even artificial induction (Kuilwijk, 1996). It has created a sharp division based on the moral stand it forces people to take or take a view at. Publicly, a section of people feels it should be illegal as the others feel it should only be restricted. The cause of dilemma in this context has been a determination of the perfect stage at which life begins (Glynn, et al. 2015). Whether it is a conception or at birth, it has held public policy makers for ransom. Abortion is further complicated as a question of the superiority of the rights of the fetus to the woman's rights are compared and contrasted same time (Freckelton & Petersen, 2006). Another twist is even added to it when questions such as "what point of a woman's pregnancy does the fetus qualify to be a human being?" arise. Such questions, therefore, complicate the whole idea of abortion leaving it to the mercies of the clergymen to give a moral direction to it (Currie, 2000).

Public dilemma:

The difficulty starts from conflicting opinions on the extent of abortion policies that need establishment. About one's personal freedom, public decision makers do not have control over each one's view of the matter; it signifies the start of the complicated nature of dilemma posed by abortion. Personal freedom here entails the right to moral convictions that onset of life is at conception. It also means one has his or her right to privacy.

The dilemmas therefore embedded in two hallmarks: that is, "pro-life" and "pro-choice" that account for a crossroad that exists in the views of the public globally. Proponents of pro-life argue that abortion is just killing, as it destruction thus removing an innocent child still developing. They equate it with murder in which morally, is unethical within the societal expectations (Glynn, et al. 2015). They also assert that it promotes promiscuity among many of the feminine genders. They even advocate for zero or no tolerance for any policies that support for abortive activities. In many of the reasons, they allege that most of the women who undertake abortion have never been victims of rape or incest. It, therefore, leaves no doubt that these individuals perform the act due to their selfish reasons. About the many reasons the pro-life advocators have, the understanding here is that they do not support abortion because it upholds human rights but because of the social implications resulting from abortion (Freckelton & Peter, 2006).

The advocators of pro-choice argue that abortion seeks to provide women with safe abortion to eliminate chances of death and trauma resulting from illegitimate means of abortion. According to them, abortion is just inevitable. Another reasoning they coin is that safe abortion reduces rates of crime.

ROLES OF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS:

Commitment to dialogue:

There are greater, safe ways of addressing public policies related to abortion, and the above is just one of them. Dialogue would ensure that citizens are enlightened about most of the profound issues regarding abortion. State departments of law and justice, are encouraged to push for negotiations that strengthen ties between the policy-makers, civil society and the public at large. They will learn to accommodate divergent views and come up with fair decisions from such forums.

Policy makers' should first understand that abortion and law must recognize both the suffering of the pregnant women and unborn children. It would help the public to make bold actions even as abortion remains a divisive policy out to the public. The state departments of health need to engage rightly with the public in offering comprehensive education on practicing reliable health measures (Freckelton & Petersen, 2006). The public and the policy makers alike will understand that two sets of rights that are in conflict needs address through peaceful dialogue.

References

Freckelton, I. R., & Petersen, K. A. (2006). Disputes and dilemmas in health law. Annandale, N.S.W: Federation Press.

Glynn, C. J., Herbst, S., Lindeman, M., O'Keefe, G. J., & Shapiro, R. Y. (2015). Public Opinion. New York: Westview Press.

Currie, S. (2000). Abortion. San Diego, Calif.: Greenhaven Press.

Kuilwijk, K. (1996). The European Court of Justice and the GATT dilemma. Beuningen: Nexed Editions in co-operation with the Center for Critical European Studies.

Question 2: Accordance of justice to Aboriginal people:

The people of Aboriginal have longed for accordance of justice on the various aspects of injustices that the government of Canada has exposed its people. They advocated for 'cleansing' which would require the government of Canada to commit itself to a new set of ethical conditions and even principles honoring the relationship between Aboriginal peoples and the state. It seeks to acknowledge and respect Aboriginal cultural values, the historical origins of Aboriginal citizenry and nationhood and right to Aboriginal self-determination. (T., & Friesen, J. W. ,2015). A keen look at the density of the Implementations to be in place, many of the recommendations in the Royal Commission would have required alteration of the constitutional.

Recommendations:

Aboriginal governance:

With respect to governance, the commission reviewed that self-determination and self-governance should focus on the aboriginal nation as a whole a not only the small communities in it. It called for establishment of aboriginal parliament even as 60-80 aboriginal groups existed who were fit for self-government. Justice could not be served well as the group represents a minority in the country. (T., & Friesen, J. W. ,2015). A single parliament is supposed to be a law-making organ in a state. It would be unjust for the state to accord them the authority to have their own set of rules that govern them.

Land and economy:

The recommendations here emphasized on the need providing adequate land and resources. It is also vital for increasing land holdings for First Nations in Southern Canada. The establishment of Independent tribunals and treaties on lands to oversee fruitful negotiations between aboriginal government and the local governments could be just. It could bring parity in matters pertaining to unlawful land allocations and discriminations and wrangles that come along with land issues could easily be solved. (T., & Friesen, J. W. ,2015).

The aboriginal people were then encouraged to form economic institutions that were a reflection of cultural values upheld accountability and could be shielded from political interference. The economic institutions prove to be vital tools in economic empowerment and therefore it could be just that the government accord necessary environment where the people of Aboriginal could do their economic activities and promote healthy lifestyles. (Douglas, V. K. ,2013)..

Socio-cultural issues:

The recommendation put forth an adoption of aboriginal healing and health strategies, an international university for the aboriginal people, educational programs to motivate its self-government and public education initiatives thus promoting cultural sensitivity and understanding among the non-members of Aboriginal people. Aboriginal people focused on the need to participate in economic and political development. (T., & Friesen, J. W. ,2015). The Nunavut Confederation proved fruitful as it is one of the implementation that is underway, marking a change in the education sector.

The health sector is also an area where the Aboriginal people think a lot of disservice is in place and therefore the government should be justified enough to make insurance covers easier for the people of Aboriginal. (Douglas, V. K. ,2013).

With the many barriers and reluctance to amendment of constitution, the Report vision to long-term program for change collapsed. Though provincial and federal governments recognize and value the Aboriginal initiatives to address both economic and social issues, there has been disinterest from the government.

Justice would never be inevitable if it involves major constitutional change to effect a small group of people in the larger Canada. On the serious issues affecting Aboriginal peoples and communities, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Report gives provision to the government on highlighting the various roles the people need to play instead of focusing on 'enormous' issues that they feel do not need justice. In the long run, justice will only be accorded to the various areas where the government feel it is satisfied within its capacity to accord. It exempts unrealistic ones such as establishment of an Aboriginal parliament that may cause discomposure to Canadians. (T., & Friesen, J. W. ,2015).

 

References:

Douglas, V. K. (2013). Introduction to aboriginal health and health care in Canada: Bridging health and Harrison,

(T., & Friesen, J. W. ,2015). Canadian society in the twenty-first century: An historical and sociological approach. healing. New York, NY: Springer.

 

sheldon

Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal: