Lately in the news, the case of Gosnell and the horrid conditions of the abortion clinic he ran has been gaining steam. While I will not go into the gruesome details, if you have not heard about this case, here is a link to a Washington Post article about it.
While this post could easily fall into the “dreaded talking points” that my professors loves so much, I was struck by an interesting and seemingly backwards argument of some who are pro-choice.
Because of the despicable conditions of Gosnell’s clinic, many are calling for stricter regulations on abortion clinics along with more inspections. From many of the articles I have read, proponents of abortion are against this, saying that it will close down more clinics making it harder for women to get an abortion.
To me, this doesn’t make sense. Yes, stricter regulations might close some abortion clinics, however, these regulations will most likely be put in place to keep the women entering these facilities safer. Would you rather go to a facility that is staffed with qualified employees and sanitary conditions, or one with lower standards where there could be outlying risks?
It shouldn’t matter if you are pro-life or pro-choice. Gosnell’s treatment of patients in his facility is appalling and should not be acceptable. Though this case in only an example of the extreme when it comes to poor medical practices, it also raise the question of the safety.
I, personally, am pro-life. I do not agree with the practice of abortion because of my religious and personal beliefs. While, that is my stance on this issue, I do not understand why those who are pro-choice would be against better regulations that in the end protect a woman and her body.