An Analysis of the Current State of Abortion right in the United States of America

Document Type : -

Author

Assistant Professor of International law, Law Department, University of Shahid Bahonar ,Kerman, Iran

10.30465/ws.2025.47760.4028

Abstract

The abortion rights movement in the United States has been influenced by two discourses including the "pro-choce movement" and the "Pro-life movement". In this article, In order to discuss the historical context of the abortion rights movement in the United States from the perspective of civil rights, the case study method with emphasise on text analysis technique was applied to study54 documents. The findings showed that the central theme of the of the "pro-choice movement" is the right to bodily autonomy, which in accordance with international human rights instruments supports women's bodily autonomy, therefore criminalizing abortion does not recognize women’s bodily autonomy and women's decision-making. Against, "pro- life movement" whose central point is to emphasize morality, the right to life of the fetus and criminalizing the abuse of the fetus. The findings indicate that attention should also be paid to the rights of the fetus and the elimination of violence against it. In addition, it is necessary for other countries to decide on the intervention of the government in the matter of fertility by referring to their context and social background. Because interference without regard to cultural and social requirements will have serious consequences for society, family and women's health.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

اسلامی، حسن (1384). « رهیافت های اخلاقی به سقط جنین؛ یک بررسی موردی »، فصلنامه باروری و ناباروری،دوره 6، شماره 4، صص321 تا 342.
تبریزی، منصوره (1393). تحلیل محتوای کیفی از منظر رویکردهای قیاسی و استقرایی. فصلنامۀ علوم اجتماعی،دوره 21، شمارۀ 64. صص 105تا138.
حاجی ده­آبادی،  محمدعلی ؛ حسن-نژاد، عاطفه و نصیری جامی نازنین (1400). مطالعه تطبیقی جنین­آزاری در نظام کیفری انگلستان، آمریکا و ایران. فصلنامه پژوهش تطبیقی حقوق اسلام و غرب، سال هشتم دوره 8،  شماره  سوم،  صص 65تا88.
مشکات ، سید مصطفی ، صلاحی ، سهراب (1397) . مطالعه سنجشی جنین آزاری در سامانه کیفری ایران و ایالات متحده آمریکا ، نشریه پؤوهش حقوق کیفری ، دوره 7،  شمارۀ 24. صص 37تا65 .
Ahmad, Danish, Mridula Shankar, Anoop Khanna, Caroline Moreau, and Suzanne Bell. (2020). “Induced Abortion Incidence and Safety in Rajasthan, India: Evidence that Expansion of Services is Needed.” Studies in Family Planning 18 (1): 1–15.
Bell, S. O., & Bishai, D. (2021). Can you repeat the question? Paradata as a lens to understand respondent experience answering cognitively demanding, sensitive questions. PloS one, 16(6), e0252512.
Bell, S. O., & Fissell, M. E. (2021). A little bit pregnant? Productive ambiguity and fertility research. Population and Development Review, 47(2), 505-526.
Campion, Steve. (2020). “Woman, Who Didn’t Know She Was Pregnant, Gives Birth in Tub.” ABC 13 Eyewitness News.
https://abc13.com/5922025/
Fischer, J. M. (2003). Abortion, autonomy, and control over one's body. Social Philosophy and Policy, 20(2), 286-306.
Hine, K. (2021). Autonomy rights and abortion after the point of viability. Bioethics, 35(8), 787-792.
Jones, R. K., J. Philbin, M. Kirstein, andE. Nash. (2021). “NewEvidence: Texas ResidentsHave ObtainedAbortions inat Least 12States ThatDoNot Border Texas.” PolicyAnalysis. New York, NY: Guttmacher Institute.
https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2021/11/new-evidencetexas-residents-have-obtained-abortions-least-12-states-do-not-border
Jones, R., E.Witwer, and J. Jerman. (2019). “Abortion IncidenceandServiceAvailability in the UnitedStates,2017.”Guttmacher Institute.doi:10.1363/2019.30760
Kissling,A., andH.M. Jackson. (2022). “Estimating Prevalence of Abortion Using List Experiments: Findings from a Survey of Women in Delawareand Maryland.”Women’s Health Issues32(1): 33–40.
Kopplin, G., Desai, S., & Lindberg, L. D. (2017). Women’s reports of multiple abortions: implications for survey data quality. Contraception, 96(4), 273.
Kumar, M. M., & Borzutzky, C. R. (2023). Restricting abortion access in the USA: implications for child and adolescent health. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 7(2), 83-85.
Mackenzie, C. (2020). Abortion and embodiment 1. In Women, medicine, ethics and the law (pp. 73-92). Routledge.
Makleff, S., Blaylock, R., Ruggiero, S., Key, K., Chandrasekaran, S., & Gerdts, C. (2023). Travel for later abortion in the USA: lived experiences, structural contributors and abortion fund support. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 1-17.
Mueller, J., Kirstein, M., VandeVusse, A., & Lindberg, L. D. (2023). Improving abortion underreporting in the USA: a cognitive interview study. Culture, health & sexuality, 25(1), 126-141.
Patev, A. J., & Hood, K. B. (2021). Towards a better understanding of abortion misinformation in the USA: a review of the literature. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 23(3), 285-300.
Ralph, L., Foster, D. G., Raifman, S., Biggs, M. A., Samari, G., Upadhyay, U., ... & Grossman, D. (2020). Prevalence of self-managed abortion among women of reproductive age in the United States. JAMA network open, 3(12), e2029245-e2029245.
Rose, M. (2011). Pro-life, pro-woman? Frame extension in the American antiabortion movement. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 32(1), 1-27.
Siegel, R. B. (2007). The new politics of abortion: an quality analysis of woman-protective abortion restrictions. U. Ill. L. Rev., 991–1064.
Solinger, Rickie. (2001). Beggars and Choosers: How the Politics of Choice Shapes Adoption, Abortion, and Welfare in the United States. New York: Hill and Wang.
Supreme Court of the United States, (2022), Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization,
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf"
United Nations Population Fund,UNFPA,(2021), My body is my own: Claming the right to autonomy and self-determination
https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/SoWP2021_Report_-_EN_web.3.21_0.pdf
UNFPA. (2022, March 16). Bodily autonomy: A fundamental right. United Nations Population Fund. Retrieved November 28, 2023.
Ziegler, Mary. (2013). Women's rights on the right: the history and stakes of modern pro-life feminism. Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law & Justice, 28(2), 232-268.
Women Studies
Volume 15, Issue 49 - Serial Number 49
November 2024
Pages 71-100

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 22 December 2023
  • Revise Date: 08 April 2024
  • Accept Date: 20 April 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics