Article_Rebuttal

University of Phoenix | Article Rebuttal | Hector WesterbandBCOM/275Prof. Thelma Gonzalez-Arvelo | October 18,2011 | The article, “Life-at-fertilization initiative has hope in Miss.”Published by Emily Wagster Pettusand and printed by the Associated Press, talks about voters of the state of Mississippi trying to approve an amendment declaring that life begins when a human egg is fertilized. The state of Mississippi is the only state that has such an amendment on its ballot but efforts are being made to put this question for voters in at least 4 other states. The amendment at the state level would have a conflict with the US Constitution. The article also states that this amendment is trying to overturn the Supreme Court case Roe vs Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established a legal right to abortion. The article touches on the subject of malpractice to physicians who perform birth control procedures like IUD. This would have a negative impact in the medical practice because physicians would be afraid of malpractice law suits or even wrongful death suites. This amendment definitely raises some issues about the already controversial subject of abortion and the rippling effect it can have. Some of the ways that this amendment can have a rippling effect is in the scientific community. The American Society for Reproductive Medicine states that it would have an effect in embryos created for the vitro fertilization process. This is a pro life medical procedure. The amendment will have a dramatic effect on the care of women and men with infertility. According to Barbara Collura, executive director of RESOLVE, "Many procedures that are part of in vitro fertilization (IVF), such as embryo cryopreservation and PGD, will be very difficult to continue to do, if not illegal, if Initiative 26 passes." (The Chilling Effect Of Mississippi'S 'Personhood Amendment', 2011). This does not seem like an amendment that is pro life to me when you think about all the parties that can be affected. There is already legal action against this amendment. One of the plaintiffs Cristen Hemmins was raped and brings to the table a very valid point that women should not have to be forced by the state to carry an unwanted baby. If the amendment passes, it will outlaw abortion in the state entirely, even in cases of rape or incest. It might even leave some forms of contraception, and procedures such as in vitro fertilization, on life support. According to Guy N. Texas, “Note that this is “fertilization” — union of egg and sperm — not implantation in the uterine wall. The latter is, as I understand it, the line the medical profession uses to mark the beginning of a pregnancy. So if this passes, it would appear that a woman could be subject to murder charges for using an IUD or taking a “Plan B” (morning after) contraceptive.” (Texas, 2011). This amendment does not seem pro life to me. It takes away the human right of a female to be able to decide what she can do with her own body. I don’t think the state has the right to interfere with the rights of women when it comes to her body. This amendment can also incriminate physicians who are trying to help young women with contraceptives so that they don’t become pregnant and in turn have to have an abortion. In my opinion this is just another case of religion interfering with the state. The only thing that I can say about this is that I’m glad I don’t live in Mississippi but in Puerto Rico. References The Chilling Effect of Mississippi's 'Personhood Amendment'. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.fertilityauthority.com Texas, G.N. (2011). Mississippi may ban abortion in cases of rape or incest ‘Personhood Amendment'. Retrieved from https://notesandrestsmakemusic.wordpress.com