I had to write an analysis on the effectiveness of a particular person's opinionated article. My teacher said my essay lacked style, form, and the correct word usage. What do I need to fix?
Elizabeth Richwine
Dr. Christine Nuener
English 1020.2IH
February 7th, 2020
What is the Purpose?
Debate - this well exercised activity helps develop our civic and political identities as humans. Every day we translate our own impressions of situations to the people around us: especially people with different views. Our answers reflect supporting evidence of our opinions and sometimes raised voices. Generally speaking, humans like to express why we are right - even if we are not. History has proven this fact. Some of the most controversial ideas throughout human existence include climate change, the shape of the earth, human cloning, weed legalization, gun rights, evolution and the age of alcohol consumption. As the 21st century continues, and individual rights are persistently fought for, the debate of abortion has become prevalent. Tanya Lurhman, journalist of the Harvard Crimson, explained her own views on the controversial topic in the article, “The Pro-Choice Movement.” Through this piece Lurhman explores the different views of abortion while trying to persuade her audience of the dominance the pro-choice view holds. Lurhman employs the rhetorical appeals of logos effectively through her use of statistics and research from national organizations related to the subject of abortion. However, her disordered placement of information, inconsistent statements, and stray from the intentional thesis, causes her readers to doubt her claims on the issue and credibility as an author.
Beginning the article, Lurhman states the topic of her writing. She starts her introductory paragraph with the comparison of religious fervor and the separate views of terminating a pregnancy. This statement introduces the audience to the idea of a person’s religious affiliations reflecting in their opinion of abortion. She then connects these separate views to different perspectives on the foundation of the mother-infant bond. Both within the first paragraph, Lurhman states the following two statements: “Invoking an almost religious fervor on both sides of the issue, abortion is one of the most emotionally potent present political controversies.” and “Motherhood is a powerful institution in American life, and both the "Pro-choice" (supporting a woman's right to choose) and the "Pro-life" (anti-abortion) forces see the other as attacking the foundations of the mother-infant bond.” Because of the placement of these statements, the readers can conclude these two sentences serve as the thesis of the article. By the process of analyzing the introductory paragraph, the typical audience would deduce that the piece’s main point is the fact that the pro-choice and pro-life arguments are both religious affiliated and interpreted by different parental relationship perspectives. As the readers continue through the passage however, it is evident that the author does not follow this thesis. With each paragraph containing a different aspect of the pro-choice movement, the overall essay examines fetus rights, the effects of , the physical toll of unwanted pregnancy, financial burdens, and the controversy of murder. While each of these topics are components of the abortion debate, they do not effectively relate back to the initial thesis statement.
The rhetorical device of logos is used frequently throughout “The Pro-Choice Movement.” Logos can be a statement, sentence, or argument used to convince or persuade the targeted audience by employing reason or logic. Lurhman uses this tool through the statistics calculated by national organizations such as The National Abortion Rights Action League and the National Center for Child Abuse and Neglect. Lurhman presents the following facts in her article; “Two-thirds of teenage pregnancies are not planned, because many do not have adequate access to contraceptives (NARAL).”, “The taxpayer price of supporting a child on welfare is far greater than that of a Medicaid abortion.” and “An estimated 9,000 victims become pregnant each year (FBI 1973); 100,000 cases of incest occur yearly (National Center for Child Abuse and Neglect, 1978).” There isn't a specific problem with these facts other than their placement. This research is all listed within the second paragraph. Each statistic is placed one after the other with no flow between the topics and correspondence to their results. The subject of is not discussed again until the twelfth paragraph, financial burden in the eighth paragraph, and consensual sex in the eleventh paragraph. This trend shows a huge gap between facts and supporting explanations of those numbers. The chaos in the writing structure negatively affects the effectiveness of the information. Even though the logical evidence is available in the essay, the disorganization creates a difficulty to the readers to follow the purpose of the statistics and their purpose to the overall theme.
The final strategy the author tries to utilize through her piece is by debunking the pro-life campaign arguments. For example the author states, “The Supreme Court decided in 1973 that the unborn fetus had no constitutional rights until the third trimester (24-28 weeks), as it is incapable of functioning independently from the mother until that time.” Shortly after this statement, Lurhman then states, “The fetus must be accorded the same constitutional rights as its mother.” These two statements directly contradict each other. First Lurhman uses the Supreme Court to justify how a fetus has no rights, yet then describes how the fetus obtains the same constitutional rights as the mother. This inconsistently happens again as the author writes, “The only morally consistent value-of-life position is to have intercourse only if one is willing to accept a child as a possible consequence and participate in the quality of the child's life.” Even though this statement backs the pro-life argument, she follows up with the view that it we can not hold two people having consensual sex to the burden of pregnancy because of the costs of contraceptives. How does accepting responsibility of a choice and the cost of that choice connect? Marking the third time the author negates her own points, the following statements are written, “Motherhood is a remarkably special bond between mother and child, perhaps the most important relationship we ever have.” and “Abortion must be available to allow women the freedom to provide the optimum conditions for their child's growth.” The confusing element of these sentences is the question of how a mother will be providing her child optimum growth opportunities when terminating her pregnancy? It is evident through these remarks that the author consistently contradicts her own points throughout her essay.
From the disorganization, inconsistencies, and structural unsteadiness within “The Pro-Choice Movement” the author’s credibility and overall effectiveness is damaged. These subtle mistakes cause the audience to experience confusion, and a fogged understanding of Lurhman’s essential claims. In reality, the authors’s writing strategies make it difficult to decipher whether the purpose f the article is to explain the different views of abortion, or to support the pro-choice campaign.