(再)生产异议:多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案中的生殖正义

IF 1.4 Q2 COMMUNICATION
Calvin R. Coker, Abigail Faulstick
{"title":"(再)生产异议:多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案中的生殖正义","authors":"Calvin R. Coker, Abigail Faulstick","doi":"10.1080/07491409.2023.2297289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The overturn of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in June 2022 solidified the patchwork nature of abortion access in the United States and clarified, for some, the need to move beyond a f...","PeriodicalId":46136,"journal":{"name":"Womens Studies in Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"(Re)productive Dissent: Reproductive Justice in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization\",\"authors\":\"Calvin R. Coker, Abigail Faulstick\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/07491409.2023.2297289\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The overturn of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in June 2022 solidified the patchwork nature of abortion access in the United States and clarified, for some, the need to move beyond a f...\",\"PeriodicalId\":46136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Womens Studies in Communication\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Womens Studies in Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2023.2297289\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Womens Studies in Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2023.2297289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2022 年 6 月推翻了 "罗诉韦德案 "和 "计划生育诉凯西案",巩固了美国堕胎服务的拼凑性质,并明确了一些人的观点,即有必要超越 "堕胎 "这一概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
(Re)productive Dissent: Reproductive Justice in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
The overturn of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in June 2022 solidified the patchwork nature of abortion access in the United States and clarified, for some, the need to move beyond a f...
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
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