A Critical Analysis of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and the Consequences of Fetal Personhood

In this paper, I will examine the Supreme Court of the United States’ (SCOTUS) arguments in the majority decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and I will show how some of those arguments are flawed. Primarily, I will show that the right to bodily autonomy is a well-established ri...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Manninen, Bertha Alvarez 1977- (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Publicado: 2023
En: Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
Año: 2023, Volumen: 32, Número: 3, Páginas: 357-367
Otras palabras clave:B Ethics
B Biomedical ethics
B Abortion
B Philosophy
B Personhood
Acceso en línea: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Descripción
Sumario:In this paper, I will examine the Supreme Court of the United States’ (SCOTUS) arguments in the majority decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and I will show how some of those arguments are flawed. Primarily, I will show that the right to bodily autonomy is a well-established right, both in the courts and in societal practices, and that the right to an abortion should be understood as an example of the right to bodily autonomy or bodily integrity. Second, I will examine the justices’ arguments that viability is not a reasonable place to restrict abortion access, in contrast to both Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and will offer arguments that defend viability as a valid point to limit abortion access. Third, I will highlight some politicians’ goals to enact a federal ban on abortion, and show how the attempt to pass Personhood Amendments is a pathway for doing so. The upshot of this essay to is show how the SCOTUS decision is flawed, and how granting personhood to "potential life" has consequences that extend beyond abortion access.
ISSN:1469-2147
Obras secundarias:Enthalten in: Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1017/S0963180122000809