Roe and the new frontier
While the abortion debate, which was legally settled by the US Supreme Court in 1973, rages on the terms of a right to fetal life and an opposing right to a woman's choice, outside of the context of abortion, advances in reproduction and technology outpace the assumptions underlying those posit...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Harvard journal of law and public policy 2003-09, Vol.27 (1), p.339-383 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 383 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 339 |
| container_title | Harvard journal of law and public policy |
| container_volume | 27 |
| creator | Roy, Lisa Shaw |
| description | While the abortion debate, which was legally settled by the US Supreme Court in 1973, rages on the terms of a right to fetal life and an opposing right to a woman's choice, outside of the context of abortion, advances in reproduction and technology outpace the assumptions underlying those positions. Precisely on this reason, Roy argues that courts have erroneously imported the Supreme Court's conclusion in Roe v. Wade that a fetus is not a constitutional person into areas of law outside the context of abortion. |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71599645</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A114283883</galeid><sourcerecordid>A114283883</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g375t-70267aaf180a9a44910a11adeed725b0106a82dca41792abe708adb1006ec3543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpt0UtLw0AQAOBFFFurd09SFAQPkX1mN8dS1BYKguh5mSSTmJJs6m6C-u-NtB4qZQ4DwzfDDHNExlxoGcVK82MypiwRkTSaj8hZCGtKqZTMnJIRUyo2XKkxuXxpcQoun3bvOHX4OS1867oK_Tk5KaAOeLHLE_L2-PA6X0Sr56flfLaKSqFVF2nKYw1QMEMhASkTRoExyBFzzVVKGY3B8DwDyXTCIUVNDeQpozTGTCgpJuR2O3fj248eQ2ebKmRY1-Cw7YPVTCVJLNUAr__Bddt7N-xmuVAsYTzhA7rZohJqtJUr2s5D9jvRzhiT3AhjxKCiA6pEhx7q1mFRDeU9f3_AD5FjU2UHG-72GgbT4VdXQh-CXS6W-_Zqd1efNpjbja8a8N_270fiBz1Ah7M</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>235191292</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Roe and the new frontier</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Political Science Complete</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><creator>Roy, Lisa Shaw</creator><creatorcontrib>Roy, Lisa Shaw</creatorcontrib><description>While the abortion debate, which was legally settled by the US Supreme Court in 1973, rages on the terms of a right to fetal life and an opposing right to a woman's choice, outside of the context of abortion, advances in reproduction and technology outpace the assumptions underlying those positions. Precisely on this reason, Roy argues that courts have erroneously imported the Supreme Court's conclusion in Roe v. Wade that a fetus is not a constitutional person into areas of law outside the context of abortion.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0193-4872</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2374-6572</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15568255</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc</publisher><subject>Abortion ; Abortion, Induced - legislation & jurisprudence ; Bioethics ; Embryo Disposition - legislation & jurisprudence ; Embryo Research - legislation & jurisprudence ; Embryo, Mammalian ; Federal legislation ; Female ; Fetus ; Fetuses ; Human reproductive technology ; Humans ; Law ; Laws, regulations and rules ; Personhood ; Persons (Law) ; Pregnancy ; Pro life movement ; Reproductive Rights - legislation & jurisprudence ; Reproductive Techniques - legislation & jurisprudence ; State court decisions ; Stem Cells ; Supreme Court Decisions ; Surgeons ; Unborn children (Law) ; United States ; Value of Life</subject><ispartof>Harvard journal of law and public policy, 2003-09, Vol.27 (1), p.339-383</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2003 Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy Fall 2003</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27843</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15568255$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Roy, Lisa Shaw</creatorcontrib><title>Roe and the new frontier</title><title>Harvard journal of law and public policy</title><addtitle>Harv J Law Public Policy</addtitle><description>While the abortion debate, which was legally settled by the US Supreme Court in 1973, rages on the terms of a right to fetal life and an opposing right to a woman's choice, outside of the context of abortion, advances in reproduction and technology outpace the assumptions underlying those positions. Precisely on this reason, Roy argues that courts have erroneously imported the Supreme Court's conclusion in Roe v. Wade that a fetus is not a constitutional person into areas of law outside the context of abortion.</description><subject>Abortion</subject><subject>Abortion, Induced - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Bioethics</subject><subject>Embryo Disposition - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Embryo Research - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Embryo, Mammalian</subject><subject>Federal legislation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fetus</subject><subject>Fetuses</subject><subject>Human reproductive technology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Laws, regulations and rules</subject><subject>Personhood</subject><subject>Persons (Law)</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pro life movement</subject><subject>Reproductive Rights - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Reproductive Techniques - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>State court decisions</subject><subject>Stem Cells</subject><subject>Supreme Court Decisions</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><subject>Unborn children (Law)</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>Value of Life</subject><issn>0193-4872</issn><issn>2374-6572</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNpt0UtLw0AQAOBFFFurd09SFAQPkX1mN8dS1BYKguh5mSSTmJJs6m6C-u-NtB4qZQ4DwzfDDHNExlxoGcVK82MypiwRkTSaj8hZCGtKqZTMnJIRUyo2XKkxuXxpcQoun3bvOHX4OS1867oK_Tk5KaAOeLHLE_L2-PA6X0Sr56flfLaKSqFVF2nKYw1QMEMhASkTRoExyBFzzVVKGY3B8DwDyXTCIUVNDeQpozTGTCgpJuR2O3fj248eQ2ebKmRY1-Cw7YPVTCVJLNUAr__Bddt7N-xmuVAsYTzhA7rZohJqtJUr2s5D9jvRzhiT3AhjxKCiA6pEhx7q1mFRDeU9f3_AD5FjU2UHG-72GgbT4VdXQh-CXS6W-_Zqd1efNpjbja8a8N_270fiBz1Ah7M</recordid><startdate>20030922</startdate><enddate>20030922</enddate><creator>Roy, Lisa Shaw</creator><general>Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc</general><general>Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>IHI</scope><scope>ILT</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030922</creationdate><title>Roe and the new frontier</title><author>Roy, Lisa Shaw</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g375t-70267aaf180a9a44910a11adeed725b0106a82dca41792abe708adb1006ec3543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Abortion</topic><topic>Abortion, Induced - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Bioethics</topic><topic>Embryo Disposition - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Embryo Research - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Embryo, Mammalian</topic><topic>Federal legislation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fetus</topic><topic>Fetuses</topic><topic>Human reproductive technology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Laws, regulations and rules</topic><topic>Personhood</topic><topic>Persons (Law)</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pro life movement</topic><topic>Reproductive Rights - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Reproductive Techniques - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>State court decisions</topic><topic>Stem Cells</topic><topic>Supreme Court Decisions</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><topic>Unborn children (Law)</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>Value of Life</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Roy, Lisa Shaw</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>Gale In Context: U.S. History</collection><collection>Gale OneFile: LegalTrac</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Harvard journal of law and public policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Roy, Lisa Shaw</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Roe and the new frontier</atitle><jtitle>Harvard journal of law and public policy</jtitle><addtitle>Harv J Law Public Policy</addtitle><date>2003-09-22</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>339</spage><epage>383</epage><pages>339-383</pages><issn>0193-4872</issn><eissn>2374-6572</eissn><abstract>While the abortion debate, which was legally settled by the US Supreme Court in 1973, rages on the terms of a right to fetal life and an opposing right to a woman's choice, outside of the context of abortion, advances in reproduction and technology outpace the assumptions underlying those positions. Precisely on this reason, Roy argues that courts have erroneously imported the Supreme Court's conclusion in Roe v. Wade that a fetus is not a constitutional person into areas of law outside the context of abortion.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc</pub><pmid>15568255</pmid><tpages>45</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0193-4872 |
| ispartof | Harvard journal of law and public policy, 2003-09, Vol.27 (1), p.339-383 |
| issn | 0193-4872 2374-6572 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71599645 |
| source | MEDLINE; Political Science Complete; PAIS Index; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Business Source Complete |
| subjects | Abortion Abortion, Induced - legislation & jurisprudence Bioethics Embryo Disposition - legislation & jurisprudence Embryo Research - legislation & jurisprudence Embryo, Mammalian Federal legislation Female Fetus Fetuses Human reproductive technology Humans Law Laws, regulations and rules Personhood Persons (Law) Pregnancy Pro life movement Reproductive Rights - legislation & jurisprudence Reproductive Techniques - legislation & jurisprudence State court decisions Stem Cells Supreme Court Decisions Surgeons Unborn children (Law) United States Value of Life |
| title | Roe and the new frontier |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T14%3A09%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Roe%20and%20the%20new%20frontier&rft.jtitle=Harvard%20journal%20of%20law%20and%20public%20policy&rft.au=Roy,%20Lisa%20Shaw&rft.date=2003-09-22&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=339&rft.epage=383&rft.pages=339-383&rft.issn=0193-4872&rft.eissn=2374-6572&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA114283883%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=235191292&rft_id=info:pmid/15568255&rft_galeid=A114283883&rfr_iscdi=true |