Analysis of Pro-Life Vs Pro-Choice Debates: Abortion and LGBTQIA Rights

  • Mahika Suri and Shyama Arun Singh
  • Show Author Details
  • Mahika Suri

    Student at the Gujarat National Law University, India.

  • Shyama Arun Singh

    Student at the Gujarat National Law University, India.

  • img Download Full Paper


This paper aims to give readers an insight into the world of abortion dynamics across the globe. Despite living in the 21st century, today’s world is witnessing numerous restrictions on women’s liberty when it comes to reproductive rights. The topic takes a sensitive turn when it comes to the creation of a political divide between the supporters and opponents of what is termed ‘the debate of “Pro-life and Pro-choice”’. The first part of the paper dwells on explaining the above two viewpoints and how they affect women. Maintaining an unbiased view, the paper further attempts to analyze the social, economic, legal, and political outcomes of the same debate and how it will affect the contemporary world. The second section of the paper examines Margaret Atwood’s spine-chilling futuristic dystopia which is infamously referred to as a “feminist’s nightmare”- The Handmaid’s Tale. The paper will analyze the current prevailing abortion regulation practices and compare them with the world set by Margaret Atwood in her despairing futuristic dystopia. Next, the paper discusses the current protest regarding abortion in the US that has emerged in light of the upcoming decision of the Supreme Court, due in June 2022, concerning the Mississippi Abortion Law which would affect the rights and lives of millions of women. At last, the paper ends with suggestive policies, a legal analysis of the laws in India, and an answer to the above-formulated dystopia. The paper ends with a set utopia of suggestive ways which reflect how granting autonomy to women can lead to a better society - economically, politically, socially, etc. Through analysis, we conclude that it is essential to give women and persons of other genders rights regarding their bodily autonomy, and not doing so would lead to harm more than overall benefit.


Research Paper


International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, Volume 5, Issue 3, Page 1409 - 1424


Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution -NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (, which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.


Copyright © IJLMH 2021