DOCSLIB.ORG

Recent Abortion Law Reforms (Or Much Ado About Nothing) Harvey L

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 60 | Issue 1 Article 2 1969 Recent Abortion Law Reforms (Or Much Ado About Nothing) Harvey L. Ziff Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Harvey L. Ziff, Recent Abortion Law Reforms (Or Much Ado About Nothing), 60 J. Crim. L. Criminology & Police Sci. 3 (1969) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. THE JounN.e., or CatnaA, LAw, CRIMnOLOGY AND POLICE SCIENCE Vol. 60, No. 1 Copyright @ 1969 by Northwestern University School of Law Pri ed in U.S.A. RECENT ABORTION LAW REFORMS (OR MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING) HARVEY L. ZIFF The author is a graduate of Northwestern University School of Law's two-year Prosecution-Defense Graduate Student Program. He received his LL.M. degree in June, 1969, after completing one year in residence and one year in the field as an Assistant United States Attorney in San Francisco, Califor- nia. The present article was prepared in satisfaction of the graduate thesis requirement. (It repre- sents the author's own views and in no way reflects the attitude of the Office of United States Attorney.) Mr. Ziff received his B.S. degree in Economics from the Wharton School of Finance of the Univer- sity of Pennsylvania in 1964. His interest turned to medical-legal problems at Stanford University Law School, where he received an LL.B. degree in 1967. While at Stanford, he was a member of the Board of Editors of the Stanford Law Review. After surveying the statutory and case law governing abortions and considering the relevant social and medical issues, Mr. Ziff recommends unregulated medical control during the first sixteen weeks of pregnancy. The law regulating induced abortion is one of The law makes no distinction based on viability. the most widely discussed medical-legal problems Criminal abortion generally refers to any untimely of the present time. In recent years literature on delivery voluntarily procured with intent to the subject has become voluminous, stirring up destroy the fetus before natural birth.5 However, intense emotional reaction and violent debate. few criminal abortions are performed after the Recently, four states have revised their laws, third month of pregnancy because abdominal using the proposal in the Model Penal Code as a operations are required after that time. 6 Conse- guide. This paper will critically evaluate the quently, most criminal abortions are categorized Model Penal Code proposal. Detailed examination correctly as abortions in medical terminology. will be made of the social problems which are responsible for recent legal revisions. This exami- GENEAIL STATE OF THE LAW nation will be followed by (1) a description of the Every state in the union has a statute which reasons why the reforms which have been passed makes the termination of pregnancy a crime. are likely to be ineffective in dealing with the However, all but Louisiana provide exceptions by conditions which impelled their enactment, (2) statute or case law 7 Most states are restrictive an analysis of the legal problems involved in and limit legal abortion to the narrow grounds of s 9 passing an effective reform, and (3) a proposal necessity to "preserve" or "save" the life of based on the preceding analysis. 5Many abortion statutes punish the attempt to The term "abortion" causes confusion because induce an abortion. Thus the crime may be committed its meaning varies according to the profession with a woman who is not pregnant. See, e.g., ILL. REv. STAT. ch. 38, §23-1 (1965). which employs it. In medical usage, abortion 76TAussIo, supra note 2, at 327-40. generally refers to the premature expulsion from LA. REv. STAT. ANN. §14.87 (1950). There is an inconsistency in the Louisiana statutes, however. Per- the uterus of the products of conception at a time formance of an abortion is not a cause for revocation of before viability, i.e., before the fetus has reached a medical license when "done for the relief of a woman such a stage of development that it can live out- whose life appears in peril...... " LA. REv. STAT. ANN. §37:1285. side the uterus." The twenty-sixth to the twenty- 8 ALAS. STAT. tit 11, §15.060 (1962). eighth week of pregnancy is regarded as the time DEL. CODE ANi. tit 11, §301 (1953). of viability.2 After that time, "miscarriage"' or FLA. STAT. AwN. §782.10 (1965). GA. CODE ANN..§26-1101 (1953). "premature labor"' are the terms used by medical HAwAnI REv. LAWS §309-3, 4 (1955). authorities for premature expulsion of the fetus. IDAuO CODE AxN. §18-601 (1948). IND. AN. STAT. §10-105 (1956). 1 DoRLAwD, ILLUSTRATED MEDICAL DICTIONARY 1689 KAN. GEN. STAT. AwN. §21-437 (1964). (24th ed. 1965). KY. REV. STAT. §436.020 (1962). 2 TAussiG, ABORTiON, SPONTANEOUS AN INnucED 21 ME.'REV. STAT. ANN. ch. 134, §9 (1954). (1936). MICH. STAT. AN. §28.204 (1962). aALOy, MnEDIcA DICTIONARY rOR LAwYERs 380 Miss. CoDE ANN. §2223 (1956). (1951). MONT. REV. CODE ANN. §94-401 (1947). 4 DosrLAN, supra note 1, at 789. NEB. REv. STAT. §28-405 (1965). HARVEY L. ZrFF [Vol. 60 the pregnant woman. Some states permit abortions Recent Legislative Revisions 1 to "preserve"'" or "save"' the life of either the Since 1967, Colorado, North Carolina, California, pregnant woman or the child. and Maryland have revised their criminal laws A few states do provide wider grounds for related to abortion. Each of these states has gen- justifiably terminating pregnancy. Thus Alabama erally followed the reforms drafted by the and the District of Columbia permit abortions to American Law Institute.17 The following dis- 12 preserve the life or health of the mother, and cussion will focus predominantly on the Model New Mexico legalizes abortions "to preserve the Penal Code provisions since it is likely that other life of the woman or to prevent serious or perma- states which are contemplating reforms will also 13 nent bodily injury" to her. use the A.L.I. proposal as a guideline. Although most states carefully regulate the The Model Penal Code provisions maintain the grounds on which pregnancy may be justifiably general state of the law in that termination of 14 terminated, the majority, apparently, permit pregnancy continues to be unlawful, unless justified 15 anyone to perform the operation. Prior to 1967, by particular circumstances. However, only a only ten states and the District of Columbia licensed physician may perform an abortion with required that a physician or surgeon perform the justification. His reasons for terminating a preg- 6 operation.j nancy may be based upon any of four grounds- N.H. PEv. STAT. ANN. §583:13 (1955). if he believes that there is a substantial risk that N.Y. REv. PEN. LAW §§125.05; 125.40; 125.45 (1967). (1) continuance of the pregnancy would gravely N.D. CENT. CODE §12-25-01 (1939). the mother, Orno REv. CODE ANN. §2901.16 (1964). impair the physical or mental health of OKLA. STAT. ANN. tit. 21, §861 (Supp. 1967). (2) the child would be born with grave physical or R.I. GEN. LAWS ANN. §11-3-1 (1956). mental dfect, (3) the pregnancy resulted from S.D. CODE §13-3101 (1960). TEN. CODE ANN. §39-301 (1955). rape, or (4) the pregnancy resulted from incest or UTAH CODE ANN.§76-2-1 (1953). other felonious intercourse. In addition, the VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 13, §101 (1958). written concurrence of two physicians on the Wyo. STAT. ANN. §6-77 (1957). 9Auz. REv. STAT. AoN. §13-211 (1956). designated grounds must be filed, either in the AREo.STAT. ANN. §41-301 (1964). hospital where the operation is to be performed ILL. REV. STAT. ch. 38, §23-1 (1965). IOWA CODE §701.1 (1950). or in any other place designated by law. N.J. REv. STAT. §2A:87-1 (1953), as interpreted in The new Colorado law provides for termination State v. Brandenburg, 137 N.J.L. 124, 58 A. 2d 709 on the grounds recommended by the (1948). of pregnancy TEX. PEN. CODE §§1191, 1196 (1961). Model Penal Code, but requires the unanimous Wis. STAT. §940.04 (1961). approval of a "special hospital board of three 10CONN. GEN. STAT. REV. §53-29 (1958). physicians" who are staff members of the hospital Mnm. STAT. §617.18 (1963). Mo. STAT. ANN. §559.100 (1953). where the operation is to take place.U North NEv. REv. STAT. §201.120 (1961). Carolina provides for termination on the Model S.C. CODE ANN. §§16-82, 16-83 (1962). WASH. REV. CODE ANN. §9.02.010 (1961). Penal Code grounds, but limits the operation to "VA. CODE ANN. §18.1-62 (1960). women who have been residents for four months, W. VA. CODE ANN. §61-2-8 (1966). 2 and who have approval of three doctors not ALA. CODE tit. 14, §9 (1959). 9 D.C. CODE ANN. §22-201 (1967). engaged in joint private practice California does For states which permit abortions when "necessary not permit potential defectiveness of the child see to preserve" the life or health of the mother basis for termination, but does MAss. GEN. LAWS ANN. ch. 272, §19 (1956), as inter as an independent preted in Commonwealth v. Brunelle, 341 Mass. 675, allow termination for the other grounds specified 171 N.E.
Recommended publications
  • Personhood Seeking New Life with Republican Control Jonathan Will Mississippi College School of Law, Jwill@Mc.Edu

    Personhood Seeking New Life with Republican Control Jonathan Will Mississippi College School of Law, [email protected]

    Mississippi College School of Law MC Law Digital Commons Journal Articles Faculty Publications 2018 Personhood Seeking New Life with Republican Control Jonathan Will Mississippi College School of Law, [email protected] I. Glenn Cohen Harvard Law School, [email protected] Eli Y. Adashi Brown University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.law.mc.edu/faculty-journals Part of the Health Law and Policy Commons Recommended Citation 93 Ind. L. J. 499 (2018). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at MC Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of MC Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Personhood Seeking New Life with Republican Control* JONATHAN F. WILL, JD, MA, 1. GLENN COHEN, JD & ELI Y. ADASHI, MD, MSt Just three days prior to the inaugurationof DonaldJ. Trump as President of the United States, Representative Jody B. Hice (R-GA) introducedthe Sanctity of Human Life Act (H R. 586), which, if enacted, would provide that the rights associatedwith legal personhood begin at fertilization. Then, in October 2017, the Department of Health and Human Services releasedits draft strategicplan, which identifies a core policy of protectingAmericans at every stage of life, beginning at conception. While often touted as a means to outlaw abortion, protecting the "lives" of single-celled zygotes may also have implicationsfor the practice of reproductive medicine and research Indeedt such personhoodefforts stand apart anddistinct from more incre- mental attempts to restrictabortion that target the abortionprocedure and those who would perform it.
  • TA(2020)0336 Abortion Rights in Poland European Parliament Resolution of 26 November 2020 on the De Facto Ban on the Right to Abortion in Poland (2020/2876(RSP))

    TA(2020)0336 Abortion Rights in Poland European Parliament Resolution of 26 November 2020 on the De Facto Ban on the Right to Abortion in Poland (2020/2876(RSP))

    European Parliament 2019-2024 TEXTS ADOPTED P9_TA(2020)0336 Abortion rights in Poland European Parliament resolution of 26 November 2020 on the de facto ban on the right to abortion in Poland (2020/2876(RSP)) The European Parliament, – having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and in particular Articles 2 and 7(1) thereof, – having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) of 4 November 1950 and the related case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), – having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), – having regard to the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, – having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948, – having regard to the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of 16 December 1966 and the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 16 December 1966, – having regard to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women of 18 December 1979, – having regard to the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 10 December 1984, – having regard to the UN Human Rights Committee’s concluding observations of 23 November 2016 on the seventh periodic report of Poland, – having regard to UNESCO’s International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education of 10 January 2018, – having regard to the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) held in Cairo in 1994, its programme of
  • A CASE for LEGAL ABORTION WATCH the Human Cost of Barriers to Sexual and Reproductive Rights in Argentina

    A CASE for LEGAL ABORTION WATCH the Human Cost of Barriers to Sexual and Reproductive Rights in Argentina

    HUMAN RIGHTS A CASE FOR LEGAL ABORTION WATCH The Human Cost of Barriers to Sexual and Reproductive Rights in Argentina A Case for Legal Abortion The Human Cost of Barriers to Sexual and Reproductive Rights in Argentina Copyright © 2020 Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 978-1-62313-8462 Cover design by Rafael Jimenez Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people worldwide. We scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. Human Rights Watch is an independent, international organization that works as part of a vibrant movement to uphold human dignity and advance the cause of human rights for all. Human Rights Watch is an international organization with staff in more than 40 countries, and offices in Amsterdam, Beirut, Berlin, Brussels, Chicago, Geneva, Goma, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, Moscow, Nairobi, New York, Paris, San Francisco, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto, Tunis, Washington DC, and Zurich. For more information, please visit our website: http://www.hrw.org AUGUST 2020 ISBN: 978-1-62313-8462 A Case for Legal Abortion The Human Cost of Barriers to Sexual and Reproductive Rights in Argentina Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1 Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 8 To the President of Argentina: .................................................................................................
  • Mifepristone

    Mifepristone

    1. NAME OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCT Mifegyne 200 mg tablets 2. QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE COMPOSITION Each tablet contains 200-mg mifepristone. For the full list of excipients, see section 6.1 3. PHARMACEUTICAL FORM Tablet. Light yellow, cylindrical, bi-convex tablets, with a diameter of 11 mm with “167 B” engraved on one side. 4. CLINICAL PARTICULARS For termination of pregnancy, the anti-progesterone mifepristone and the prostaglandin analogue can only be prescribed and administered in accordance with New Zealand’s abortion laws and regulations. 4.1 Therapeutic indications 1- Medical termination of developing intra-uterine pregnancy. In sequential use with a prostaglandin analogue, up to 63 days of amenorrhea (see section 4.2). 2- Softening and dilatation of the cervix uteri prior to surgical termination of pregnancy during the first trimester. 3- Preparation for the action of prostaglandin analogues in the termination of pregnancy for medical reasons (beyond the first trimester). 4- Labour induction in fetal death in utero. In patients where prostaglandin or oxytocin cannot be used. 4.2 Dose and Method of Administration Dose 1- Medical termination of developing intra-uterine pregnancy The method of administration will be as follows: • Up to 49 days of amenorrhea: 1 Mifepristone is taken as a single 600 mg (i.e. 3 tablets of 200 mg each) oral dose, followed 36 to 48 hours later, by the administration of the prostaglandin analogue: misoprostol 400 µg orally or per vaginum. • Between 50-63 days of amenorrhea Mifepristone is taken as a single 600 mg (i.e. 3 tablets of 200 mg each) oral dose, followed 36 to 48 hours later, by the administration of misoprostol.
  • Summary of Roe V. Wade and Other Key Abortion Cases

    Summary of Roe V. Wade and Other Key Abortion Cases

    Summary of Roe v. Wade and Other Key Abortion Cases Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973) The central court decision that created current abortion law in the U.S. is Roe v. Wade. In this 1973 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that women had a constitutional right to abortion, and that this right was based on an implied right to personal privacy emanating from the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments. In Roe v. Wade the Court said that a fetus is not a person but "potential life," and thus does not have constitutional rights of its own. The Court also set up a framework in which the woman's right to abortion and the state's right to protect potential life shift: during the first trimester of pregnancy, a woman's privacy right is strongest and the state may not regulate abortion for any reason; during the second trimester, the state may regulate abortion only to protect the health of the woman; during the third trimester, the state may regulate or prohibit abortion to promote its interest in the potential life of the fetus, except where abortion is necessary to preserve the woman's life or health. Doe v. Bolton 410 U.S. 179 (1973) Roe v. Wade was modified by another case decided the same day: Doe v. Bolton. In Doe v. Bolton the Court ruled that a woman's right to an abortion could not be limited by the state if abortion was sought for reasons of maternal health. The Court defined health as "all factors – physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age – relevant to the well-being of the patient." This health exception expanded the right to abortion for any reason through all three trimesters of pregnancy.
  • The Other Half of the Abortion Right

    The Other Half of the Abortion Right

    GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works Faculty Scholarship 2018 The Other Half Of The Abortion Right Thomas Colby George Washington University Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Colby, Thomas, The Other Half Of The Abortion Right (2018). The Other Half of the Abortion Right, 20 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 1043 (2018).; GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2018-46; GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2018-46. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3269572 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE OTHER HALF OF THE ABORTION RIGHT Thomas B. Colby* TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................................................................................. 1044 I. WHY THE PURPOSE PRONG MATTERS ........................................... 1050 II. UNDUE BURDEN, PURPOSE, AND THE TIERS OF SCRUTINY .......... 1055 III. WHAT DOES THE PURPOSE PRONG PROHIBIT? ........................... 1063 A. Perhaps There Is No Purpose Prong .................................................. 1063 B. But Really There Is ........................................................................ 1067 1. Permissible Purposes ...............................................................
  • Does the Fourteenth Amendment Prohibit Abortion?

    Does the Fourteenth Amendment Prohibit Abortion?

    PROTECTING PRENATAL PERSONS: DOES THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT PROHIBIT ABORTION? What should the legal status of human beings in utero be under an originalist interpretation of the Constitution? Other legal thinkers have explored whether a national “right to abortion” can be justified on originalist grounds.1 Assuming that it cannot, and that Roe v. Wade2 and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylva- nia v. Casey3 were wrongly decided, only two other options are available. Should preborn human beings be considered legal “persons” within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, or do states retain authority to make abortion policy? INTRODUCTION During initial arguments for Roe v. Wade, the state of Texas ar- gued that “the fetus is a ‘person’ within the language and mean- ing of the Fourteenth Amendment.”4 The Supreme Court rejected that conclusion. Nevertheless, it conceded that if prenatal “per- sonhood is established,” the case for a constitutional right to abor- tion “collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaran- teed specifically by the [Fourteenth] Amendment.”5 Justice Harry Blackmun, writing for the majority, observed that Texas could cite “no case . that holds that a fetus is a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.”6 1. See Antonin Scalia, God’s Justice and Ours, 156 L. & JUST. - CHRISTIAN L. REV. 3, 4 (2006) (asserting that it cannot); Jack M. Balkin, Abortion and Original Meaning, 24 CONST. COMMENT. 291 (2007) (arguing that it can). 2. 410 U.S. 113 (1973). 3. 505 U.S. 833 (1992). 4. Roe, 410 U.S. at 156. Strangely, the state of Texas later balked from the impli- cations of this position by suggesting that abortion can “be best decided by a [state] legislature.” John D.
  • Supreme Court of the United States

    Supreme Court of the United States

    Nos. 18-1323, 18-1460 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L.L.C., et al., Petitioners, v. DR. REBEKAH GEE, Secretary, Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, Respondent. –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– DR. REBEKAH GEE, Secretary, Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, Cross-Petitioner, v. JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L.L.C., et al., Cross-Respondents. ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES CouRT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRcuIT BRIEF FOR IF/WHEN/HOW: LAWYERING FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE, ET AL. AS AMICI CURIAE SUPPORTING PETITIONERS FARAH DIAZ-TELLO REBECCA S. ENGRAV SARA L. AINSWORTH LAUREN J. TSUji Counsel of Record PERKINS COIE LLP YVEKA PIERRE 1201 Third Avenue, REBECCA WANG Suite 4900 JILL E. ADAMS Seattle, WA 98101 IF/WHEN/HOW: LAWYERING FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE ARIEL B. GLICKMAN 1730 Franklin Street, PERKINS COIE LLP Suite 212 700 13th Street N.W., Oakland, CA 94612 Suite 600 (347) 974-7337 Washington, D.C. 20005 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae 292850 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ................................. 1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................................................. 2 ARGUMENT ................................................................. 4 I. Act 620 Exacerbates Abortion Stigma and Engenders Confusion About Its Legality ............ 4 A. Act 620 and Restrictions Like It Contribute to Abortion Stigma .................... 4 B. Restrictions Like Act 620 Also Sow Confusion About the Legality of Abortion ........................................................ 8 II. This Stigma and Confusion Contribute to the Criminalization of People Who End or Are Suspected of Ending Their Own Pregnancies ......................................................... 10 A. Restrictions Like Act 620 Increase the Likelihood That People Will Seek Self- Managed Abortion ...................................... 10 B.
  • Abortion Laws and Women's Health

    Abortion Laws and Women's Health

    DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES IZA DP No. 11890 Abortion Laws and Women’s Health Damian Clarke Hanna Mühlrad OCTOBER 2018 DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES IZA DP No. 11890 Abortion Laws and Women’s Health Damian Clarke Universidad de Santiago de Chile and IZA Hanna Mühlrad Lund University OCTOBER 2018 Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and not those of IZA. Research published in this series may include views on policy, but IZA takes no institutional policy positions. The IZA research network is committed to the IZA Guiding Principles of Research Integrity. The IZA Institute of Labor Economics is an independent economic research institute that conducts research in labor economics and offers evidence-based policy advice on labor market issues. Supported by the Deutsche Post Foundation, IZA runs the world’s largest network of economists, whose research aims to provide answers to the global labor market challenges of our time. Our key objective is to build bridges between academic research, policymakers and society. IZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author. IZA – Institute of Labor Economics Schaumburg-Lippe-Straße 5–9 Phone: +49-228-3894-0 53113 Bonn, Germany Email: [email protected] www.iza.org IZA DP No. 11890 OCTOBER 2018 ABSTRACT Abortion Laws and Women’s Health* We examine the impact of progressive and regressive abortion legislation on women’s health and survival in Mexico. Following a 2007 reform in the Federal District of Mexico which decriminalised and subsidised early-term elective abortion, multiple other Mexican states increased sanctions on illegal abortion.
  • Herbal Abortifacients and Their Classical Heritage in Tudor England

    Herbal Abortifacients and Their Classical Heritage in Tudor England

    Penn History Review Volume 20 Issue 1 Spring 2013 Article 3 December 2013 Herbal Abortifacients and their Classical Heritage in Tudor England Alex Gradwohl University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/phr Recommended Citation Gradwohl, Alex (2013) "Herbal Abortifacients and their Classical Heritage in Tudor England," Penn History Review: Vol. 20 : Iss. 1 , Article 3. Available at: https://repository.upenn.edu/phr/vol20/iss1/3 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/phr/vol20/iss1/3 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Herbal Abortifacients H#%1.0 A1'%$+&.2+#-$, .-* $)#+% C0.,,+2.0 H#%+$.3# +- T4*'% E-30.-*: Alex Gradwohl Although birth control is often considered to be a modern innovation, various forms of homeopathic anti-fertility measures have been in use since ancient times. Discussed at length by the great Greco-Roman medical authorities, certain herbs have long been utilized for their abortion-inducing properties. Centuries later, the extensive herbal guides and other medical texts of Tudor England seem to largely ignore the subject of anti-fertility herbs. Despite this apparent silence, however, classical knowledge of herbal abortifacients did not GLVDSSHDULQVL[WHHQWKFHQWXU\(QJODQG,QÁXHQFHGE\FKDQJLQJ attitudes and social acceptability concerning abortion, English medical and herbal writers included disguised information about certain herbs’ potential abortive uses, providing Tudor women with an important means to control their fertility.1 It is easy to overlook the inclusion of abortifacients when examining Tudor medical and herbal sources since they generally do not overtly reference or explain the uses of these herbs.
  • Abortion Law: "Unique Problem for Women"T Or Sex Discrimination?

    Abortion Law: "Unique Problem for Women"T Or Sex Discrimination?

    Abortion Law: "Unique Problem for Women"t Or Sex Discrimination? Twiss Butlertt The campaign for the Equal Rights Amendment to the United States Constitution employed a political strategy that excluded women's access to abortion, along with other basic equality issues, from the orthodox analysis of why the Equal Rights Amendment was needed and what it was expected to do. As part of this costly strategy, women's pregnancy rights were located in a sex-neutral right of privacy. The privacy right has subsequently been used as a "gotcha" against women's right not only to privacy, but to equality as well. 1. POLITICAL CONSTRAINTS ON THE ERA LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Some twenty years ago, leading proponents of the Equal Rights Amendment faced an extraordinary opportunity to redefine constitutional equality from a man-to-man standard to a human standard. Their goal was ratification of the amendment. They could choose to pursue ratification as advocates for women or as politicians. That is, they could create a vision of how equality would look if it were done right. They could seek through public discourse to inspire women to claim that vision by using the only right women have that is recognized by the Constitution-the right to vote, guaranteed by the Nineteenth Amendment. Or they could, in consultation with lawyers and legislators, strategize to treat the principle of constitutional equality as any other piece of negotiable, special interest legislation by stripping out the toughest parts, agreeing on some trade-offs, and going for what they thought they could get. History indicates that ERA proponents chose the second option, making a strategic decision by accretion' to argue that the ERA would have "nothing t In a 1974 letter, Yale Law Professor Thomas Emerson described abortion as a "unique problem for women" that does not raise equal protection issues.
  • The Beginning of Personhood: a Thomistic Biological Analysis

    The Beginning of Personhood: a Thomistic Biological Analysis

    © 2000 Bioethics 14(2): 134-157. THE BEGINNING OF PERSONHOOD: A THOMISTIC BIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS JASON T. EBERL ABSTRACT “When did I, a human person, begin to exist?” In developing an answer to this question, I utilize a Thomistic framework which holds that the human person is a composite of a biological organism and an intellective soul. Eric Olson and Norman Ford both argue that the beginning of an individual human biological organism occurs at the moment when implantation of the zygote in the uterus occurs and the “primitive streak” begins to form. Prior to this point, there does not exist an individual human organism, but a cluster of biological cells which has the potential to split and develop as one or more separate human organisms (identical twinning). Ensoulment (the instantiation of a human intellective soul in biological matter) does not occur until the point of implantation. This conception of the beginning of human personhood has moral implications concerning the status of pre-implantation biological cell clusters. A new understanding of the beginning of human personhood entails a new understanding of the morality of certain medical procedures which have a direct affect on these cell clusters which contain human DNA. Such procedures discussed in this article are embryonic stem cell research, in vitro fertilization, procured abortion, and the use of abortifacient contraceptives. INTRODUCTION In the arena of bioethical enquiry, one of the newest and most controversial subjects is embryonic stem cell (ES cell) research. This research involves the harvesting of stem cells from human embryos. Stem cells are “the primordial, largely undifferentiated cells of an organism.