Remember that the research paper will run between 8-10 pages, will integrate sources from a diverse array of resources using MLA style, will have a clear thesis/research question as the backbone of the paper, will avoid fallacious rhetoric, and will construct logical arguments to advance the ideas in the paper. In short, the research paper is where you fulfill the goals you set forth in your proposal paper.Here are a few important tips that you should keep in mind:Use effective transitions between paragraphs.Include only those details and sources that support your thesis. Don’t go off on tangents or include opinions that don’t point back to the thesis.Each paragraph should have a topic sentence. A paragraph needs at least 5-8 sentences that fully and adequately support the topic sentence.Use appropriate tone, voice, and persuasion.Don’t use too many quotations in your paper.Cite your sources properly IN THE BODY OF YOUR PAPER (the text of your paper) according to MLA formatting.Read your sentences aloud to check for run-ons and fragments.Don’t end a paragraph with a quote. If you quote something, your next sentence should be your own thoughts, analysis, and comments on that quote.Notes: 1. You have answered some of my questions before like annotated bibliography, proposal essay, sentence outline about the abortion and mental health.2. Please use the result of SurveyMonkey survey (Responses_positive.pdf). I have a total of 52 respondents but only 12 have abortions.3. Please write the essay based on the sentence outline you made for me because that’s the one I submitted to my teacher. Please use also the seven sources (abortion1.docx) that I attached.I appreciate your help and thank you.
abortion1.docx
bibliography_proposal.docx
research_paper_guidelines.pdf
responses_positive.pdf
sentence_outline.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Note: This document contains 7 articles or sources:
1. Adjudging a Moral Harm To Women From Abortions
2. Currents — Mental Health: New Front in Abortion Battle; Both Sides Await Report
That Charts the Effects on Mental Health
3. Post-Abortion Emotional Problems Harm Women
4. Abortion Does Not Increase Mental Health Problems for Women
5. Abortion and mental health: myths and realities
6. Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health
7. Abortion and mental health: quantitative synthesis and analysis of research published
1995–2009
Report Information from ProQuest
August 25 2016 04:03
25 August 2016
ProQuest
Table of
contents
1. Adjudging a Moral Harm To Women From Abortions. ……………………………………………………………………………… 1
Bibliography. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
25 August 2016
ii
ProQuest
Document 1 of 1
Adjudging a Moral Harm To Women From Abortions
Author: Greenhouse, Linda
ProQuest document link
Abstract (Abstract): Reflecting the court’s view that illegal abortions were a serious public health problem,
the opinion gave examples of permissible regulations, like requiring doctors to be properly licensed. After
fetal viability, the court said in Roe v. Wade, abortion can be banned except when ending a pregnancy is
necessary for the sake of a woman’s life or health.
Never until Wednesday had the court held that an abortion procedure could be prohibited because the
procedure itself, not the pregnancy, threatened a woman’s health — mental health, in this case, and
moral health as well. In his majority opinion, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy suggested that a pregnant
woman who chooses abortion falls away from true womanhood.
Despite the activity in the states, the anti-abortion movement’s new focus remained largely under the radar
until it emerged full-blown in Justice Kennedy’s opinion. As evidence that ”some women come to regret their
choice to abort the infant life they once created and sustained,” Justice Kennedy cited a brief filed in the case
by the Justice Foundation, an anti-abortion group that runs a Web site and telephone help line for women
”hurting from abortion.” The brief contained affidavits from 180 such women, describing feelings of shame,
guilt and depression.
Links: Check for full text at Rio Salado, Base URL to Journal Linker:
Full text: That abortion is bad for fetuses is a statement of the obvious. That it is bad for women, too,
is a contested premise that nonetheless got five votes at the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
It was a development that stunned abortion rights advocates and that represents a major departure from
how the court has framed the abortion issue for the past 34 years. The question on the day after the
justices voted 5 to 4 to uphold the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act is where the court goes from here.
Regulating abortion for the sake of a woman’s health has been part of the court’s consideration since Roe
v. Wade in 1973; Justice Harry A. Blackmun wrote for the court then that ”the state does have an
important and legitimate interest in preserving and protecting the health of the pregnant woman.”
Reflecting the court’s view that illegal abortions were a serious public health problem, the opinion gave
examples of permissible regulations, like requiring doctors to be properly licensed. After fetal viability, the
court said in Roe v. Wade, abortion can be banned except when ending a pregnancy is necessary for the
sake of a woman’s life or health.
But never until Wednesday had the court held that an abortion procedure could be prohibited because
the procedure itself, not the pregnancy, threatened a woman’s health — mental health, in this case, and
moral health as well. In his majority opinion, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy suggested that a pregnant
25 August 2016
Page 1 of 4
ProQuest
woman who chooses abortion falls away from true womanhood.
”Respect for human life finds an ultimate expression in the bond of love the mother has for her child,” he
said. Justice Kennedy conceded that ”we find no reliable data” on whether abortion in general, or the
procedure prohibited by the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, causes women emotional harm. But he said it
was nonetheless ”self-evident” and ”unexceptional to conclude” that ”some women” who choose to
terminate their pregnancies suffer ”regret,” ”severe depression,” ”loss of esteem” and other ills.
Consequently, he said, the government has a legitimate interest in banning a particularly problematic
abortion procedure to prevent women from casually or ill-advisedly making ”so grave a choice.”
If ”a necessary effect of the regulation and the knowledge it conveys will be to encourage some women to
carry
25 August 2016
Page 2 of 4
ProQuest
the infant to full term,” Justice Kennedy continued, that outcome will advance ”the state’s interest in
respect for life.”
The shift in the court’s discourse was ”enormous,” said Prof. Reva B. Siegel of Yale Law School. It was,
she said, ”beyond Alice in Wonderland: criminalize abortion to protect women.”
In an article to be published shortly in The University of Illinois Law Review, Professor Siegel traces the
migration of the notion of abortion’s harm to women from internal strategy sessions of the anti-abortion
movement in the 1990s to the formation of legal arguments and public policy.
The South Dakota abortion ban that the state’s voters repudiated in November was a prime example of
that strategy coming at least temporarily to fruition. Entitled ”South Dakota Women’s Health and Human
Life Protection Act,” the ban included as an official legislative purpose the protection of ”the mother’s
fundamental natural intrinsic right to a relationship with her child.”
The South Dakota Legislature has also enacted an ”informed consent” law requiring doctors to tell a patient
seeking an abortion that ”the pregnant woman has an existing relationship” with the ”unborn human
being” in her uterus. Whether the state can require such a script is a question that was argued last week
before the federal appeals court in St. Louis. The language would be unlikely to raise alarms at the Supreme
Court, based on the majority opinion on Wednesday.
On his blog, Balkinization, Prof. Jack M. Balkin of Yale Law School defined the message behind what he
called the ”new paternalism”: ”Either a woman is crazy when she undergoes an abortion, or she will
become crazy later on.”
Despite the activity in the states, the anti-abortion movement’s new focus remained largely under the radar
until it emerged full-blown in Justice Kennedy’s opinion. As evidence that ”some women come to regret their
choice to abort the infant life they once created and sustained,” Justice Kennedy cited a brief filed in the case
by the Justice Foundation, an anti-abortion group that runs a Web site and telephone help line for women
”hurting from abortion.” The brief contained affidavits from 180 such women, describing feelings of shame,
guilt and depression.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissenting opinion contained a quotation: ”Our obligation is to define the
liberty of all, not to mandate our own moral code.” The line had appeared twice before in Supreme Court
opinions, most recently four years ago, in Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion that struck down the Texas
sodomy law in Lawrence v. Texas and overturned the 1986 anti-gay-rights precedent, Bowers v. Hardwick.
It appeared for the first time 11 years before that, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the decision that
reaffirmed the right to abortion with an unusual joint opinion; the line is in the portion of the opinion
usually attributed to Justice Kennedy.
The question that combatants on both sides of the abortion wars are now asking themselves is, which is
the Anthony Kennedy for the Roberts court: the author of that sentiment, or the one who, on
Wednesday, left a familiar shore, embarking with a narrow majority on a journey to an uncertain
destination.
25 August 2016
Page 3 of 4
ProQuest
Subject: Supreme Court decisions; Psychological aspects; Mental health; Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act
2003- US;
Location: United States US
People: Kennedy, Anthony
M
Company / organization: Name: Supreme Court-US; NAICS: 922110;
Publication title: New York Times, Late Edition (East Coast)
Pages: A.18
Number of pages:
0
25 August 2016
Page 4 of
4
ProQuest
Publication year: 2007
Publication date: Apr 20, 2007
Year: 2007
Dateline: WASHINGTON, April 19
column: News Analysis
Section: A
Publisher: New York Times Company
Place of publication: New York, N.Y.
Country of publication: United States
Publication subject: General Interest Periodicals–United States
ISSN: 03624331
CODEN: NYTIAO
Source type: Newspapers
Language of publication:
English Document type: News
ProQuest document ID: 433563841
Document URL:
http://ezp1r.riosalado.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/433563841?accountid=40965
Copyright: Copyright New York Times Company Apr 20, 2007
Last updated: 2010-08-10
Database: National Newspapers Core
25 August 2016
Page 5 of 4
ProQuest
Bibliography
Citation style: MLA 8th Edition
Greenhouse, Linda. “Adjudging a Moral Harm To Women From Abortions.” New York Times, New York, N.Y.,
2007.
Contact ProQuest
Copyright 2016 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. – Terms and Conditions
25 August 2016
ProQuest
Report Information from ProQuest
August 25 2016 04:07
25 August 2016
ProQuest
Table of
contents
1. Currents — Mental Health: New Front in Abortion Battle; Both Sides Await Report That Charts the
Effects on Mental
Health…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
1
Bibliography. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
25 August 2016
ii
ProQuest
Document 1 of 1
Currents — Mental Health: New Front in Abortion Battle; Both
Sides Await Report That Charts the Effects on Mental Health
Author: Simon,
Stephanie ProQuest
document link
Abstract: Activists on both sides are awaiting a comprehensive report reviewing two decades of published
research on mental health and abortion, to be presented this week at the American Psychological
Association’s annual conference in Boston. Supporters of legal abortion are increasingly acknowledging the
sorrow that can come with the decision, and independent support groups are promising to help women
work through their loss without promoting a political agenda.
Links: Check for full text at Rio Salado, Base URL to Journal Linker:
Full text: For decades, the cultural battle over abortion has been about what goes on inside a woman’s
womb. But more and more, the focus is shifting to what goes on inside her head.
Activists on both sides are awaiting a comprehensive report reviewing two decades of published research
on mental health and abortion, to be presented this week at the American Psychological Association’s
annual conference in Boston.
The report comes at a pivotal time as some judges and lawmakers have begun to make decisions in
part based on peer-reviewed studies suggesting women who have had abortions are at higher risk of
anxiety, depression and substance abuse.
Abortion opponents cite these studies, as well as testimony from women who describe years of
psychological turmoil after abortions, to make the case that the state must restrict abortion to protect
women’s mental health. The U.S. Supreme Court cited this reasoning last year in upholding a ban on a lateterm procedure known as partial-birth abortion. South Dakota incorporated the same rationale into a new
mandate that abortion doctors must tell prospective patients they will be putting themselves at risk for
psychological distress and suicide.
The abortion-hurts-women view is also being used to promote a broad abortion ban on South Dakota’s
fall ballot. The argument: A woman may think she wants to end a pregnancy, may even feel relief when
she does, but she will suffer for it later. So the state has a duty to stop her.
To supporters of legal abortion, this is equivalent to saying the state has a duty to warn women away
from giving birth because some might later suffer postpartum depression. They acknowledge some
women may regret their decision or feel sad about it, but say there is no proof abortion leads to serious
mental illness — or that women would be better off if they were forced to carry unwanted pregnancies.
25 August 2016
Page 1 of 4
ProQuest
Both sides agree the mental-health issue has powerful potential to shape public policy for years to come.
And both hope to use the American Psychological Association’s report to their advantage.
The organization has long held that abortion has no negative mental- health consequences for most women.
Indeed, the psychologists’ group and the separate American Psychiatric Association say it is crucial for women’s
mental health that they have access to safe, legal abortions.
About two years ago, the psychological association pulled its fact sheet on mental health and abortion from
its Web site for updating. The result is exhaustive but ambiguous, according to reviewers who have seen
drafts. These reviewers cautioned that they haven’t seen the final report. But they said the drafts state that
some women may experience higher rates of emotional distress after abortions. Most vulnerable: teens and
young women who feel pressured into or ambivalent about their abortions and who lack solid support
networks.
The brisk conclusion paragraph on a recent draft, however, focuses on adult women seeking elective
abortions in the first trimester of an unwanted pregnancy — which covers the majority of abortions. The
takeaway
25 August 2016
Page 2 of 4
ProQuest
message: They have no greater risk of mental-health problems.
The American Psychological Association wouldn’t comment until the final report is released.
But reviewers on both left and right are troubled by the draft language. Supporters of legal abortions want a
more sweeping statement that abortion is safe for mental health. They say the studies that suggest potential
harm are riddled with methodological error.
“I would hope it would say that there is no convincing empirical evidence that abortion is a significant cause
of psychiatric illness,” said Nada Stotland, president of the American Psychiatric Association, which isn’t
affiliated with the psychological association.
From the antiabortion side, there is frustration that the report focuses on women who do well after
abortions instead of warning patients and their doctors about those who may need help.
Priscilla Coleman, a researcher at Bowling Green State University in Ohio whose work is often cited approvingly
by abortion opponents, said at least 10% to 20% of women suffer serious, prolonged ill effects from abortion.
“We’re not doing women any favors by hiding this,” she said.
For all the heated rhetoric on both sides, in the real world of clinics and crisis counselors, a middle
ground appears to be emerging.
Supporters of legal abortion are increasingly acknowledging the sorrow that can come with the decision, and
independent support groups are promising to help women work through their loss without promoting a
political agenda.
But in 35 years of providing abortions, Susan Hill, a clinic director based in Raleigh, N.C., said she has noticed
that “women today need less counseling, less psychological care than they did in 1973,” when abortion was
legalized but still carried an enormous stigma. Ms. Hill, who runs clinics in five southern states, has tried
offering postprocedure counseling sessions — but very few women show up, she said. “They want to get
past it and move on with their lives.”
Quantifying any possible mental-health effect of abortion is extremely difficult, though scores of researchers
have tried. Many studies share the flaw that they rely on women self-reporting their abortion history, which
is notoriously unreliable. There is also the issue of what is an appropriate control group: All women? Women
who have given birth? Women who have carried an unwanted pregnancy and given the baby up for
adoption?
Another problem: determining cause and effect. A woman who has had an abortion may be depressed, but
that doesn’t mean the abortion caused the depression. Perhaps she was in an abusive relationship, or had
money trouble, or felt alone and abandoned.
Recent research has tried to control for such variables. A much- cited 2006 study drew on a New Zealand
health survey that tracked a group of women for 25 years. The authors controlled for more than a dozen
factors
— family stability, educational achievement, self- esteem and so on — and still found that young women who
had abortions were more likely to suffer mental-health ills than those who carried a pregnancy to term (or
25 August 2016
Page 3 of 4
ProQuest
those who never got pregnant).
The study has limitations. It covered just 139 young women who self- reported abortions. But the study’s
lead author, David Fergusson, supports legal abortion — and said he was “irked” by his own finding — which
gives his conclusion some added heft in a world in which both sides use charges of authorial bias to dismiss
studies they disagree with.
Mr. Fergusson, a professor at the University of Otago in New Zealand, said he is leaning toward a belief that
abortion is associated with negative mental-health outcomes, but he said it is too early to “draw strong
conclusions either way.” Plus, he said, even if his hunch is correct, there may be counterbalancing benefits.
Aborting an unwanted pregnancy could allow a woman to finish school, get a better job and build morefulfilling personal relationships.
He hopes the upcoming report will provide some clarity — but with such an incendiary topic, that might
be tough. As he put it: “Both sides have been able to reconstruct the same evidence to meet their
agendas.”
25 August 2016
Page 4 of
4
ProQuest
Subject: Studies; Womens health; Abortion; Mental
health; Publication title: Wall Street Journal, Eastern
edition Pages: A.16
Publication year: 2008
Publication date: Aug 12, 2008
Year: 2008
Place of publication: New York, N.Y.
Publication subject: Business And Economics–Banking And Finance
ISSN: 00999660
Source type: Newspapers
Language of publication: English
Document type: Commentary
ProQuest document ID: 399034158
Document URL:
http://ezp1r.riosalado.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/399034158?accountid=40965
Copyright: (c) 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner.
Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Last updated: 2010-06-26
Database: National Newspapers Core
25 August 2016
Page 5 of 4
ProQuest
Bibliography
Citation style: MLA 7th Edition
Simon, Stephanie. “Currents — Mental Health: New Front in Abortion Battle; both Sides Await Report that Charts the
Effects on Mental Health.” Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition ed.Aug 12 2008. ProQuest. Web. 25 Aug.
2016 .
Contact ProQuest
Copyright 2016 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. – Terms and Conditions
Post-Abortion Emotional Problems Harm Women
Abortion, 2010
From Opposing Viewpoints in Context
“Ask anyone who has had an abortion if it has affected her in a negative
way mentally, and she will most likely tell you that it did.”
Having an abortion increases the likelihood that a woman will experience mental
disorders, according to Corinne Cords in the following viewpoint. Cords contends
that multiple studies have proven that …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Recent Comments