ed abortion nation-wide, the decision did not go without certain guidelines and restrictions. The Court divided a womans pregnancy into three trimesters. The trimester system served as the guideline for the Court to establish abortion restrictions. The Court based their abortion policy around the time periods allowed by the trimester system. Karen OConnor explains the implications of the trimesters, The Justices in Roe divided pregnancy into trimesters and defined different rights as applying to each of the three categories (p.47). In the first trimester (first 3 months of pregnancy) the Court declared that a woman, after consulting her physician, has an absolute right to obtain an abortion free from state interference. However, in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy, the Court gave an increasing amount of power to the state to regulate abortion procedures. Finally, regarding the last trimester of pregnancy, the justices concluded that the states, to promote the interests of potential human life, could regulate or prohibit abortions, except when they were necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother (p.47). It is with this philosophy, the division of pregnancy into trimesters, I find fault in the Courts decision in Roe v. Wade. The decision is flawed because the restrictions and regulations of the abortion policy are based on the medical technology of the time. The Court gave more power to the States over abortion procedure for pregnancies in the second and third trimesters because late-term abortions were deemed dangerous. Justice OConnor comments on the problem of basing Roe on trimesters, Roe was on a collision course with itself because the trimester approach was unworkable in light of rapidly changing medical technology (p.97). The problem with using the trimester approach to formulate an abortion policy can also be understood by looking into the problems with the ruling of Brown v. Board of Education (1954). In...
