Although Americans have debated abortion since the 19th century, the subject exploded in importance around the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which established women's right to abortion. The central conflict in the abortion debate revolves around the ethical question of whether it is acceptable to compel a woman to continue a pregnancy against her will in situations where there is a predicted threat to the life of both the baby and the mother, or when the unborn child is certain to have birth defects or result from criminal acts like rape or incest. This circumstance was also highlighted in the Roe v. Wade case when Jane Roe successfully challenged the Texas legislation to legalize abortion with a specified note from a doctor (Oyez). By comparing and evaluating different health risks, birth defects through scientific methods, and cases where pregnancy is due to criminal acts (such as rape or incest), people can identify these situations for pregnant individuals to access safe and legal abortion services. Therefore, the US must protect the rights of pregnant women when the lives of the mother and child are at risk, or when pregnancy has resulted from rape or incest, since prioritizing the health and well-being of the mother will save lives by preventing avoidable harm and fatalities. This is done while acknowledging and addressing the severe emotional and psychological trauma women endure in these circumstances, empowering them to make informed and empowered decisions about their bodies and reproductive health. 

One reason to protect abortion rights is the prevalence of severe maternal morbidity during pregnancy. Severe maternal morbidity refers to unanticipated outcomes during labor and delivery that lead to substantial short- or long-term consequences for a woman's health (CDC). Extensive medical research emphasizes the potential life-threatening pregnancy complications that healthcare providers and doctors can identify. Complications like severe pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, placenta previa, and other pregnancy-related medical conditions pose significant risks to the mother's health and life (Cleveland). For instance, pre-eclampsia, characterized by elevated blood pressure and organ involvement during pregnancy, endangers both the mother and the developing fetus (Cleveland). The lack of treatment allows this condition to progress rapidly, ultimately leading to strokes, seizures, and organ failure, and directly threatening the mother's life. Furthermore, there is an even more severe form of pre-eclampsia: Eclampsia. This condition not only jeopardizes the mother's well-being but also potentially results in maternal death (Cleveland).

In situations where a pregnancy complication poses a direct threat to the life of the mother, the option of abortion is often considered a medical intervention to protect the mother's health and well-being. According to the Department of Health and Human Services’s EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) medical facilities must assess and treat individuals in labor, emergencies, or potential emergencies, they say “emergency conditions include ‘ectopic pregnancy, complications of pregnancy loss, or emergent hypertensive disorders, such as preeclampsia with serious features’” should be allowed as exceptions (The Associated Press). Furthermore, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure explicitly emphasizes that federal law mandates healthcare providers to offer stabilized care to individuals with emergency medical conditions, regardless of their state of residence. This requirement encompasses the provision of abortion care when it is deemed necessary in emergencies (The Associated Press).

Restricting access to safe and legal abortion services in certain states needlessly exposes states without access to increased health risks. The recent Supreme Court ruling, which grants individual states the authority to interpret abortion regulations, contributes to the confusion and potential ramifications. Without clear and consistent regulations ensuring access to abortion services, women in states with restrictive laws may face significant hurdles in obtaining necessary medical care. This lack of access forces women to either travel long distances or seek unsafe alternatives, endangering their health and lives. In such situations, the lack of accessible abortion care intensifies the risks linked to pregnancy complications, as delays or obstacles in obtaining prompt treatment can result in significant and irreversible consequences for maternal health.

Advancements in medical technology have greatly enhanced the capacity to detect birth defects during the early stages of pregnancy. A range of diagnostic procedures and screening tests enable healthcare professionals to evaluate the developing fetus for potential abnormalities. Ultrasound imaging provides detailed visualization of the fetus, enabling doctors to detect structural anomalies. Furthermore, non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) examines fetal DNA in the mother's blood to screen for chromosomal abnormalities like Down syndrome. Given that viability can be determined early in pregnancy, it is logical to permit abortions in instances where it is known that the fetus will not survive.

Abortion access in the United States is marked by a fragmented and restrictive approach, which poses challenges for its citizens. Laws and regulations about abortion vary significantly across states, with many states implementing restrictive measures or even outright bans on abortion. This patchwork of laws has resulted in significant barriers to accessing safe and legal abortion services, particularly for women living in rural or low-income areas such as Texas, Oklahoma, and Kentucky ban abortion entirely, and enforcing those bans through criminal penalties are characterized as illegal (Center for Reproductive Rights). In contrast, the United Kingdom, a pregnancy charity, mentions that if the diagnosis is made before 24 weeks, the woman can have a termination under Ground C of the Abortion Act 1967 (Tommy). After 24 weeks, doctors must decide whether the anomaly diagnosed fits the criteria of Ground E of the Abortion Act where there is a substantial risk of giving birth to a child with a severe physical or mental handicap (Tommy). With this in mind, the legality of abortion should encompass cases where the fetus is diagnosed with fatal birth defects by adopting a similar legal framework and making this right completely protected by the Constitution regardless of where they live or their socio-economic status. Extending legal protection to include cases of fatal birth defects maintains consistency in the legal framework surrounding abortion rights, it recognizes that the decision to have an abortion in such cases is based on valid medical reasons and should be treated equally and without discrimination.

Legalizing abortion for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest is extremely important in protecting women's physical and mental well-being. Supporters argue that imposing government restrictions on women's right to choose abortion adds a burden to victims of criminal acts. This unequal treatment potentially perpetuates the trauma experienced by these women, violating their right to equal protection and reinforcing their victimization. Choosing to continue an unwanted pregnancy in such situations can cause intense emotional and psychological anguish, worsening the trauma linked to the criminal act. However, by ensuring safe and legal access to abortion, women gain the power to make choices that prioritize their overall well-being and aid in their recovery. The Global Campaign to Stop Rape & Gender Violence in Conflict, a pro-abortion and reputable international organization dedicated to advocating for the rights of survivors of sexual violence, focuses specifically on sexual violence and conflict (NAESV). The discussion of rape exemptions concerning abortion access emphasizes the importance of ensuring survivors of sexual violence have access to safe and legal abortions, as denying this option only adds to the trauma they have already experienced. Carefully considering the ethical considerations and implications surrounding the availability of abortion services for rape survivors, it becomes clear that granting them the right to access these services can effectively alleviate significant burdens in all aspects of their lives.

The inability to access abortion when a woman's or baby's life is at risk, particularly in cases of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, can have profound psychological impacts. Individuals may experience a wide range of emotional and psychological challenges as a result. Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine highlights the profound consequences of denying women this essential healthcare option (NEJM). The trauma resulting from rape or incest can lead to lasting psychological effects, including symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD. Long-term consequences of being unable to obtain an abortion in situations where a woman's or baby's life is at risk, or in cases of rape or incest, can include chronic stress, challenges in forming future relationships, and an increased risk of self-harm or suicide. These factors have been identified as major contributors to pregnancy-associated mortality, with suicide and overdose being the leading causes of death among pregnant and postpartum women (NEJM). Moreover, being denied an abortion can perpetuate a sense of victimization, reinforcing a loss of control and exacerbating emotional distress. Hence, Drs. Ogbu-Nwobodo and Shim stress that “laws in a democratic nation should reflect the will of the people, and structural systems in a just society should produce equitable outcomes,” to prevent dealing with additional mental illnesses that could impact women (NEJM). 

To address the challenges and protect the health and rights of pregnant individuals effectively, a constitutional amendment is necessary. The Constitution is the fundamental, legal framework for safeguarding individual rights and ensuring equal protection under the law. Enshrining the right to access safe and legal abortion care in the Constitution establishes a uniform and consistent standard across the nation, overriding varying state laws and interpretations. This would ultimately provide pregnant individuals with the necessary assurance that their reproductive health decisions will be respected and protected, regardless of their geographic location. Additionally, a constitutional amendment would serve as a powerful tool to prevent the erosion of reproductive rights over time. It would provide a stronger foundation for legal challenges against restrictive abortion regulations and policies that infringe upon the rights of pregnant individuals. The mother is an individual with rights, responsibilities, and aspirations that make her unique. By prioritizing her life, we acknowledge her autonomy and recognize her right to make decisions regarding her health and well-being. While acknowledging the argument regarding the unborn child's right to life, it is important to take into account the circumstances of conception and the potential health risks faced by the mother. It is worth noting that equating the termination of a pregnancy to murder oversimplifies the complex and nuanced nature of reproductive health decisions. If we condemn a mother as a "murderer" for prioritizing her own life in such circumstances, it follows logically that individuals who oppose abortion should also face murder charges when their position leads to an unsuccessful pregnancy resulting in miscarriage or immediate death due to birth defects. It is essential to recognize that the right to life should not be used as a weapon to endanger the lives and well-being of pregnant individuals.

Given the complexities and ongoing debates surrounding women's abortion rights, rather than relying on the continuous overturning or waiting for decisions in Roe v. Wade or other evolving movements, it is prudent to consider the development of a new amendment to the US Constitution that specifically establishes a woman's right to an abortion in these circumstances. Pregnant women in the US must be afforded constitutional protection to ensure that no state can infringe upon their right to abortion when the life of the mother and child is at risk or when pregnancies result from criminal acts as many states in the United States still prohibit abortion with no exceptions. It is crucial to recognize that legalizing abortion in cases of fatal health risks, birth defects, and pregnancies resulting from sexual violence ensures that women have access to safe and regulated medical procedures. When abortion is illegal or heavily restricted, it increases the likelihood of unsafe and potentially life-threatening procedures performed under unregulated conditions. Therefore, it is ethically wrong to compel a pregnant woman to proceed with the pregnancy against her wishes in cases where her health is at fatal risk, the fetus exhibits significant birth abnormalities, or the pregnancy results from criminal acts. Such situations warrant constitutional protection.