RethinkingRoe v. Wade: Defending the Abortion Right in the Face of Contemporary Opposition

Abstract

In 2008, many states sought to pass Human Life Amendments, which would extend the definition of personhood to encompass newly fertilized eggs. If such an amendment were to pass, Roe v. Wade, as currently defended by the Supreme Court, may be repealed. Consequently, it is necessary to defend the right to an abortion in a manner that succeeds even if a Human Life Amendment successfully passes. J.J. Thomson's argument in "A Defense of Abortion" successfully achieves this. Her argument is especially strong when one considers that her central thesis-that one person's right to life does not entail the right to use another's person's body for continued sustenance-is pervasive in legal policies in the U.S.A.

Reproductive Rights and Informed Consent: Toward a More Inclusive Discourse

“…Particular myths that misinform the public also have a pronounced impact on the legislation that has been proposed and in many cases enacted, particularly since 2010 in the United States, since such myths form the crux of the argument for informed consent for American women pursuing abortion services. Examples of such myths include a disproven causative link between abortion and breast cancer, a medically unsubstantiated relationship between early fetal development and pain, fallacious claims of enduring medical complications such as impaired fertility, and erroneous assertions that abortion causes persistent deleterious mental health problems, such as suicide, traumatic stress response, and depression (Manninen, ; Medoff, ; Stotland, ; Weitz, ). Assertions that abortion causes traumatic responses in women have resulted in the propagation of a manufactured postabortion syndrome, not recognized by the American Psychological Association (APA) nor by the American Psychiatric Association, and based on “claims…[that are] clearly unsubstantiated” (Dadlez & Andrews, , p. 447).…”

“…Restrictive legislation based substantially on misinformation about abortion serves to hamper women's access to reproductive care, particularly access to abortion services. Examples of such legislation include parental notification and consent laws, mandatory waiting periods, and preabortion counseling in which “women are read a state‐prepared script meant to warn them of the dangers of abortion” (Manninen, , p. 34) and which is intended to “create feelings of guilt, anxiety, and powerful emotional reactions to the recognizable form of a human fetus” (Woodcock, , p. 497). Pro‐life legislators often propose restrictions under the semblance of informed consent.…”

“…Undergirding the legal restrictions to abortion in a political climate increasingly hostile to women are assertions that women regret abortions, are physically and psychologically harmed by them, and are advantaged by continuing their pregnancies to term (Annas, ; Beckner, , Manninen, ; Medoff, ). Many of the proposed and enacted legislations are based on the notion of informed consent such that pro‐life advocates and lawmakers argue that all women ought to have detailed information about fetal development and about the physical and mental health risks of abortion before being able to terminate a pregnancy.…”

Twin pregnancy, fetal reduction and the 'all or nothing problem’

“…14 Many, including Thomson, think that although the person has a right to life, he does not have a right to use your body to sustain his own life and it is morally permissible for you to detach yourself from the violinist. 22 By parity of reasoning, abortion is permissible as well.…”

Yes, the baby should live: a pro-choice response to Giubilini and Minerva

“…In another essay, I argued that pro-choice advocates should cease building their arguments in favour of abortion rights upon the premise that human fetuses are not persons 16. The reasons I argue this are fourfold.…”