Article project

  

PROJECT 1

1 PAGE ARTICLE PROJECT

You are a freelance writer with a multitude of political, media and international connections who has been hired to write the closing commentary in a popular fiercely independent social/politically oriented magazine. 

The Editor-in-Chief who has hired you has specified that you write a balanced yet persuasive piece as a commentary with the main focus of expanding the general public’s knowledge in regard to the economy, recent national tragedies, ongoing/ending wars and/or changes in administration, inequities in spending/budgeting, and/or issues related to the environment or public privacy OR any other topic you wish to broaden the scope of understanding for your audience.

You are to reflect on this current issue as the 47TH POTUS faces challenges in his NEW term in office, State of the Union and a changing global climate and outlook. 

Your main focus of this commentary is to make suggestions and to investigate and reveal the major impact of Mass Media/Technology on populous/political decision-making.

You are a balanced reporter who will provide rationale for or against current decisions made about your topic of choice. You may offer general or specific suggestions/ conclusions as you address these issues. 

Your years of experience and expertise are vital and could have the possibility of affecting the current social/political climate and scope of your readers. Take caution in your discourse!

Format:

Title of your article -Headline/Byline

1-page single-spaced 2 column format- SEE WORD TOOLBAR OR HELP IN WORD

10-point type size

NO FANCY TYPE STYLES

Must include ONE photograph inserted in the text 

Must include one pulled quote in a bold and larger type size

Must include at least 4 informally documented sources 2 SUPPORT 2 OPPOSE 2 NEUTRAL

Must include quotes from either POLITICAL candidates or EXPERTS IN THE AREA [These are from your sources]

Must include supporting evidence and opposing viewpoints on the issues you address.

Assessing the Impact of Abortion Restrictions in Texas

Written by: Ava Mears
Published on: September 19th, 2024

Upon the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v.
Wade in mid 2022 with the ruling of Dobbs v. Jackson
Women’s Health Organization, Texas initiated a “trigger law”
that went into effect on August 25, 2022, banning nearly all
abortions and making it a felony to perform an abortion, except
in cases where the mother’s life is at risk. In the article “Gov.
Abbott to Abortion Opponents: ‘All of You Are Life Savers,’”
published on the Texas Tribune January 28th of 2023, author,
William Melhado, quotes Abbott, who attended the 2023 Texas
Rally for Life, “All of you are life savers, and thousands of
newborn babies are the result of your heroic efforts.” Despite
these flattering words, recent studies reveal that the infant
mortality rate in Texas has increased. Featured on Jama
Network, the article “Infant Deaths After Texas’ 2021 Ban on
Abortion in Early Pregnancy” published on June 24, 2024, and
written by PhD researchers Alison Gemmill, Claire Margerison,
Elizabeth Stuart, and Suzanne Bell, reveals after thorough
analysis of infant birth and death rates, that Texas has
experienced a 12.9% increase in infant deaths between 2021
and 2022. Additionally, the study found that, in 2022, Texas
had a 22.9% increase in infant deaths caused by congenital
anomalies, while the other states averaged a 3.1% decrease.

Due to the forbiddance of this essential medical
procedure, hundreds of women in Texas have since been
forced to carry a baby who possesses a fatal condition to term.
According to Mary Tuma, who wrote the July 9th, 2024 article,
“A New Study Confirms That the Texas Abortion Ban ‘Is
Responsible’ for a Rise in Infant Deaths” for The Nation, one
such victim, Samantha Casiano, had a pregnancy in which the
baby was diagnosed with anencephaly, a condition where the
infant is missing parts of the brain and skull. Casiano “lacked
the resources to travel for abortion care,” and had to watch her
baby “gasp for air for four hours before ultimately dying.” This
is a severely traumatic event that no woman nor family deserve
to go through and carry with them, and as long as these
restrictive laws are in place, many more tragic stories like
Casiano’s will emerge.

“Politicians are forcing women to carry doomed
pregnancies and give birth to babies who will
live only a few painful minutes or hours. This
suffering is man-made—it’s being inflicted by
Texas lawmakers.” – Nicolas Kabat

Forcing a woman to carry and deliver an unintended
and/or unwanted pregnancy can have serious future
implications, including mental health decline and long-term
financial hardship for the woman and her family. This is
especially impactful for minority women, single mothers,
women who already can’t afford to miss work or travel
out-of-state, and minors who may not have parental support.
Gabriella Francis puts this into perspective in her July 7, 2022
publication, “Counting the Cost of the Abortion Ban,” featured
on Chatham House, where she analyzes and compares costs
of abortion and costs of childbirth. She finds that abortion costs
only range from a few hundred dollars to $1,500, according to
Planned Parenthood, while the Health Care Cost Institute
estimates an average cost of $13,000 for giving birth. However,

costs also mount after birth, with childcare averaging around
$1,300 monthly. Women deserve a government that uplifts
them and promotes their bodily freedom of choice rather than
one that institutes intrusive laws that dig the vulnerable deeper
into the ground.

Some anti-abortionists may argue that adoption is a
viable alternative, but, in reality, it would only further fill an
already overburdened foster and adoption system. Contributing
to the issue of “adoption as an alternative,” Cecilia Lenzen’s
August 12th, 2022 article “Can Adoption Replace Abortion?
Experts Say It’s a Lot More Complicated Than It Sounds,”
featured on the Texas Tribune, quotes Malinda Seymore, a law
professor at Texas A&M: “Adoption doesn’t do what abortion
does. It does not end a pregnancy, it does not relieve the
burden of pregnancy, it does not avoid the health risks of
pregnancy, it does not alleviate the psycho-social harm of
relinquishing for adoption. It is not at all a substitute for
abortion.”

Even in the absence of a medical emergency,
financial struggle, rape, or any other factors, a woman’s choice
on this matter is fundamental to bodily autonomy, a human
right that has been long recognized. However, in a stunning
display of government overreach, Texas has infringed on this
deeply personal and private right of choice. In the Texas
legislature, only 48 of 181 (27%) representatives are women.
This wildly disproportionate ratio, followed by a right-winged,
male governor, indicates that this decision is being made
predominantly by men, who cannot possibly understand or
empathize with a woman on this matter. On The Guardian,
Mandy Catron’s October 11th, 2018 article, “Men Have No Idea
What Women Go Through to Have Children,” shares, “Of
course women are less eager to have children than their
partners are; the costs–to our bodies, our careers, our
finances–are just so much higher,” which well captures the
hardships of labor and how it is easy for a man, who is not
personally impacted by abortion laws, to make a selfish and
narrow-minded decision for all women. Consequently, this ban
completely reinforces gender inequality and undermines
women’s autonomy over their own reproductive health.

Ultimately, we have gone back to an age before Roe
v. Wade, in which politicians dictate women’s personal health
decisions–an age where we see a criminalization of pregnancy
and an essential form of health care perish. Although U.S.
conservatives have temporarily won the battle over Roe v.
Wade, the struggle for women’s rights will persist far into the
future.