Griswold v. Connecticut Estelle Griswold began her fight for contraception (birth control) in the 1940s. She traveled to different slums of the world and realized that these places were largely overpopulated. This sparked an interest in her. She believed that inadequate information about contraception was a major cause of human misery both abroad and even in segments of the Connecticut population. When she returned to New Haven, she joined the Planned Parenthood League and soon became its Executive Director, a position held until 1965. This was when allegations were held against her and Dr.
C. Lee Buxton for opening a birth control clinic to dispense condoms and contraception. Both Griswold and Buxton were arrested within a week, but they didnt fight the arrest. They knew this was the chance to bring justice for the right to privacy. Soon after the Supreme Court accepted the case. The question asked in the Supreme Court was this: Does the Constitution protect the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on a couples ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives? This was asked to further prove that a Connecticut state law violated a persons right to privacy. Griswolds case was based not only by this right, but also by the fact that the Connecticut law was of personal judgement and not of thinking for the health and welfare of those in a situation needing contraception.
The Term Paper on Griswold V. Connecticut 2
... of Self-Administering Emergency Contraception." The New England Journal of Medicine, 339(1), 1-4. Griswold v. Connecticut. (1965). 381 U.S. 479. ... unanimous acceptance of contraception that now exists in this country. The court's recognition of individuals' right to privacy in deciding ... when and whether to have a child in Griswold became the basis for ...
A largely supported point was that this broken law prevented anyone, under any circumstancelife or death, of using any contraceptive. This meant that if a persons welfare and life depended on an abortion or a form of contraception, it was illegal. Griswolds side fought against this and claimed that it was unfair to make such a personal choice for a person or a couple. Although the Constitution did not explicitly protect a general right to privacy, the various guarantees within the Bill of Rights created zones that established a right to privacy. Together, the First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments created a new constitutional right, the right to privacy in marital relations. The Connecticut statute conflicted with the exercise of this right and was therefore considered to be void. This 1965 Supreme Court decision not only overturned an out-of-date obscenity law but also ended up defining a new constitutional right to privacy.
It brought about the movement for people to personally choose whether or not to use contraception. Birth control and condoms are not unfamiliar terms used today. Although the fight against it has continued, the wide use of it has prevented an end. Estelle Griswold started a controversy and made an outrageous statement to the people of Connecticut. But she stood up for what she believed to be the rights of the citizens of this country. And by the ruling of the Supreme Court, she obviously was not the only one to feel this way.
I agree with the ruling because it is a personal choice. I believe it had an impact on our legal system and that it still does today. The ruling has affected the outcome of many cases over the past decades, and if its liable enough to stand for this long, then it must be of importance to the people of this country. Thats why it still stands the same today.
