The process where an expectant woman terminates the pregnancy is called abortion. Recently, there has been a lukewarm reception of abortion seeking. This means that abortion morality has continued to receive a warm welcome from some people. An increased acceptance of abortion means that it is considered moral. While debating on approving abortion, the time element has also been considered. When should abortion be conducted? This question lays ground a strong justification for abortion. If it is done within the sixteen weeks of pregnancy, then proposers of abortion would tie it to morality because no life of a person has been lost. Some researchers have also offered counterarguments of abortion morality, meaning that they are for abortion immorality. This mixed reaction has generated a compelling question, “Is abortion moral or immoral? In addressing this question, it will be important not only to focus on the works of the researchers. For that reason, the focus needs to be on the religious and cultural interpretations of abortion. Most cultural and religious institutions believe that it is illegal to do an abortion. This overlooks the personal account of abortion seeking. To effectively argue about whether it is moral or immoral to do an abortion, it is important to examine what the researchers are saying, personal decisions, and interpretations of cultural, religious, and political institutions. From the evidence gathered on the topic of abortion morality vs. immorality, my position is that it is moral to do it in some situations, meaning that the position will be grounded on the aspect of permissibility.

Abortion is moral because it is in line with constitutional facets like liberty expression, and access to approved healthcare services. A country sets up constitutional laws to promote morality. The citizens are supposed to follow the constitutional doctrines. A violation of it will be regarded as immoral. Abortion projects a personal decision. If conducted, the woman will be exercising her freedom of expression. In a civilized state, everyone is free to do whatever he or she feels like. A personal decision must be respected. Abortion, which is a decision on health matters has to be respected. Some might use the same constitution to disapprove of abortion. It is immoral to kill and a person who kills another should be subjected to prosecution. The personal decision in this perspective will be repelled as it will lack merit. However, the permissibility of abortion should center on when; the question of why should not be of significant importance (Greasley, 2017) If the expectant woman decides to do it when the pregnancy is within sixteen weeks, then exercising the freedom of expression will be in tuck. This is because the fetus has not developed. The definition of a person should play a critical role to justify the pregnancy termination. A person has developed feelings is aware of the surroundings and has multiple intelligences. The fetus, within the sixteen weeks of pregnancy, has not become a person. There is no scientific proof that the fetus at that period has developed senses like touch, smell, and hearing. This makes it not to be regarded as a person. The decision to abort means that one will be exercising the freedom of expression without compromising another constitutional facet.

As a personal decision, abortion is consolidated by the fundamental right to access acquire quality treatment. It should be noted that abortion falls under the program of sexual health. Everyone regardless of race or gender affiliations has the right to better health treatment. There are policies like the Affordable Care Act that exists to emphasize the provision of healthcare services without being compromised by variable like gender (Pain, 2021). The health policies only facilitate access to better healthcare services. It becomes immoral when the healthcare provider judges the person seeking an abortion. It becomes unconstitutional when the healthcare provider has access to sexual health program. This portrays the insensitive healthcare provider as immoral and the patient seeking abortion as moral. By blocking abortion seeking access, the healthcare provider will be amplifying stigmatization. It means that the healthcare provider negatively perceives the patient seeking an abortion. This healthcare provider will also be disregarding the individual’s choice, indicating a deliberate suppression of the freedom of expression. When faced with a healthcare provider promoting stigmatization, the patient might be forced to turn to unsafe abortion procedures; which may lead to the death of the victim. Moreover, the insensitive healthcare provider will be instead perceived immoral. Also, when accessing the sexual health program, the healthcare provider will advise on how to do safe abortion. Abortion becomes moral when it is conducted by a healthcare provider who will not put t