Abortion Rights after Artificial Wombs: Why Decriminalisation is Needed Ahead of Ectogenesis
Claire Horn
Medical Law Review, 2021, vol. 29, issue 1, 80-105
Abstract:
Significant scientific progress has been made toward artificial womb technology, which would allow part of human gestation to occur outside the body. Bioethical and legal scholars have argued that artificial wombs will challenge defences of abortion based in arguments for protecting bodily autonomy, for a pregnant person could have the foetus transferred to an artificial womb instead of being terminated. Drawing on examples from the common law jurisdictions of Canada, the USA, and the UK, I assess three ways scholars have argued abortion might be defended after ectogenesis (through redefining foetal viability, through a property right, and through a right to avoid genetic parenthood). I argue that while each of these proposals has strategic merit, each has significant legal and ethical limitations. Taking the normative position that abortion will remain a vital healthcare resource, I make the case for protecting abortion rights from a challenge posed by ectogenesis by focusing on decriminalisation.
Keywords: Abortion; Artificial wombs; Ectogenesis; Pregnancy law; Law and technology; Reproductive rights (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/medlaw/fwaa042 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:medlaw:v:29:y:2021:i:1:p:80-105.
Access Statistics for this article
Medical Law Review is currently edited by Professor Sara Fovargue and Professor Jose Miola
More articles in Medical Law Review from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().