Isabel Arizona

Addressing Abortion

The movement towards furthering pro-choice policies in the United States is one that should not be overlooked.

Dear Future President,

I am advocating for the propagation of pro-choice abortion policies in the United States. I believe that the government should work towards pro-choice policies, as women deserve to make decisions regarding their futures and those of their children. Pro-choice decisions can also improve the country’s economic and political condition, through reductions in welfare costs to taxpayers and the decrease of poverty and unemployment.

It’s important to understand that women deserve control over what happens in their lives, especially as abortion directly affects both mental and physical health. A September 2013 study by Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health found that women who were denied abortions “felt more regret and anger”, and that 95% of women who aborted were later satisfied with their decision. Furthermore, women who are refused abortions are more likely to “become unemployed, to be on public welfare… below the poverty line, and become victims of domestic violence” (, 2016). This information was supported by a UC San Francisco study (2015), which found that women who were denied abortion were much more likely to be below the poverty line. The study also found that women who were unable to receive an abortion were more likely to remain in an abusive relationship and as a result, become victims of domestic abuse.

Additionally, women who may need an abortion do so because they are incapable of caring for their child, or feel that a baby should not come unwanted. As confirmed by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (2016), children conceived unintentionally are more likely to suffer from birth defects, maternal depression, child abuse, and other unfortunate possibilities. As a result, a parent may not want to bring a disadvantaged child into the world, as they may also feel incapable of caring for special needs. As stated by Deborah Anne Driscoll (MD) of the University of Pennsylvania, “many couples… don’t have the resources, don’t have the emotional stamina, don’t have the family support [to raise a child with Down syndrome]” (, 2016).

Finally, pro-choice approaches lead to a reduction in welfare costs to taxpayers. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) tested an anti-abortion bill, in order to analyze its potential economic effects. The CBO found that “the resulting additional births would increase the federal deficit by $225 million over nine years… increased need for Medicaid coverage” (, 2016). In addition, those seeking abortion may be doing so due to economic incapability; therefore, the offspring is likely to depend upon welfare assistance. Other economic consequences of pro-life include the propagation of further financial debt of the family, economic disadvantages of potential overpopulation, and the costs of healthcare towards offspring who may suffer from birth defects as a result of unwanted conception.

Ultimately, the movement towards furthering pro-choice policies in the United States is one that should not be overlooked. It’s clear that allowing women a choice in the futures of both them and their children has immediate advantages, ranging from economic improvements to a decrease in domestic abuse and poverty. I hope that you greatly consider these standpoints when making executive decisions, such as the appointment of a new Supreme Court justice. Thank you for your deliberation, and I wish you the best of luck with presidency.



Works Cited: "Should Abortion Be Legal?", 30 June 2016, (University of California San Francisco) “Turnaway Study”, 2015,

Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment. “Reducing unintended pregnancy” CDPHE, 2016,