Raymond, Elizabeth G. and Hillary Bracken. “Early Medical Abortion Without Prior Ultrasound”. Contraception 92.3 (2015): 212-214. Web.
This article examines gestation abortion rates, and the difference between those that receive an ultrasound compared to those, that simply report the number of days sense their cycle. Elizabeth Raymond and Hillary Bracken conclude based on their research that it is more likely that when an abortion is done an ultrasound should be completed to determine the exact date of gestation. The authors argue that when women go over the limit of gestation age of 63 or 70 days there is extreme consequences that are more likely to occur (214). This article presents insightful information on studies that have been done to show how the gestation age can truly produce adverse effects, and that it is important to use ultrasound testing. It is easy for one to say they are at a gestational age, and not realize that they are truly at a different age.
The authors have a strong argument and do a very good job of supporting it with evidence from their studies. Improvements could have been made by developing more analysis off of the results they received and going into further details. They establish good credibility by explaining exactly where the evidence they used came from, and being able to analyze the results they received. They appeal to the audience by presenting true risk factors that could affect a women physically, and emotionally.
This source raises ethical issues around abortion and ultrasounds in general. It leads to the question that many ask in today’s culture of should a women have to look at an ultrasound before receiving an abortion. This is a prominent question in today’s culture, as many religions disagree with abortion. This article would be an important argument to show that ultrasounds should be used for a physical aspect of the well-being of the mother if an abortion is to be performed.