Pain that only she must bear: on the invisibility of women in judicial abortion rhetoric.

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2022-03-16 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsac003
F Laguardia
{"title":"Pain that only she must bear: on the invisibility of women in judicial abortion rhetoric.","authors":"F Laguardia","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsac003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The graphic and bodily facts of a legal question of rights are relevant to the courts, particularly in questions that directly implicate physical bodies and pain, such as right to die cases, or what level of search may be allowable and when. However, in the case of abortion, or more specifically the bodily ramifications of pregnancy and childbirth, this detail is conspicuously absent. This article, relying on a content analysis of over 220 legal opinions on abortion rights, documents this absence of rhetoric. Particularly in the context of other discussions of pain and physical health risks in these very same cases, the complete absence of an acknowledgement of the bodily ramifications of pregnancy and childbirth appears purposeful, if perhaps not conscious. Reviewing prior literature on abortion rights and abortion rhetoric, it is likely that this lack of language both reflects and reinforces an assumption of women's roles as mothers, a general reluctance to acknowledge the totality of the sacrifices women make in giving birth, and the refusal to acknowledge women's individual interests as whole persons.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":" ","pages":"lsac003"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/35/5a/lsac003.PMC8924427.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsac003","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The graphic and bodily facts of a legal question of rights are relevant to the courts, particularly in questions that directly implicate physical bodies and pain, such as right to die cases, or what level of search may be allowable and when. However, in the case of abortion, or more specifically the bodily ramifications of pregnancy and childbirth, this detail is conspicuously absent. This article, relying on a content analysis of over 220 legal opinions on abortion rights, documents this absence of rhetoric. Particularly in the context of other discussions of pain and physical health risks in these very same cases, the complete absence of an acknowledgement of the bodily ramifications of pregnancy and childbirth appears purposeful, if perhaps not conscious. Reviewing prior literature on abortion rights and abortion rhetoric, it is likely that this lack of language both reflects and reinforces an assumption of women's roles as mothers, a general reluctance to acknowledge the totality of the sacrifices women make in giving birth, and the refusal to acknowledge women's individual interests as whole persons.

只有她必须承受的痛苦:论堕胎司法修辞中女性的不可见性。
法律权利问题的图形和身体事实与法院有关,特别是在直接涉及身体和痛苦的问题中,例如死亡权案件,或允许进行何种程度的搜查以及何时进行搜查。然而,在堕胎的情况下,或者更具体地说,怀孕和分娩的身体后果,这一细节显然是缺席的。本文通过对220多条关于堕胎权利的法律意见的内容分析,证明了这种缺乏修辞的情况。特别是在讨论同样情况下的疼痛和身体健康风险的背景下,完全不承认怀孕和分娩对身体的影响似乎是有目的的,如果可能不是有意识的。回顾以前关于堕胎权利和堕胎修辞的文献,这种语言的缺乏很可能反映并加强了对妇女作为母亲的角色的假设,普遍不愿承认妇女在生育过程中作出的全部牺牲,以及拒绝承认妇女作为一个整体的个人利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信