Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Dworkin and Casey on abortion.

Sarah Stroud

    Philosophy & Public Affairs
    |April 1, 1996
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Diaphyseal Femur Fractures: How to Avoid Failures and Manage Problems.

    Instructional course lectures·2025
    Same author

    Management of Chronic Fracture-Related Infection.

    Instructional course lectures·2025
    Same author

    Association between opioid utilization and patient-reported outcome measures following lumbar spine surgery.

    The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society·2024
    Same author

    Effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on fracture healing in children: A systematic review.

    World journal of orthopedics·2022
    Same author

    Recurrent <i>Lactobacillus</i> Bacteremia in a Patient With Leukemia.

    Journal of investigative medicine high impact case reports·2017
    Same author

    Dual colorimetric and luminescent assay for dipicolinate, a biomarker of bacterial spores.

    The Analyst·2013
    Same journal

    Valuing health.

    Philosophy & public affairs·2006
    Same journal

    Principled compromise and the abortion controversy.

    Philosophy & public affairs·2006
    Same journal

    Global health and the scientific research agenda.

    Philosophy & public affairs·2005
    Same journal

    Identity, killing, and the boundaries of our existence.

    Philosophy & public affairs·2003
    Same journal

    The real tragedy of the commons.

    Philosophy & public affairs·2003
    Same journal

    Brain death and spontaneous breathing.

    Philosophy & public affairs·2003
    See all related articles

    This article examines Ronald Dworkin's views on abortion rights, arguing his religious basis for abortion access has radical consequences. It also critiques the constitutional standard in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

    Area of Science:

    • Legal Philosophy
    • Constitutional Law
    • Bioethics

    Background:

    • Examines Ronald Dworkin's recent scholarship on abortion rights, specifically his articles and book.
    • Analyzes the Supreme Court's 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed Roe v. Wade while upholding abortion restrictions.
    • Highlights the central role of interpreting the concept of sacred human life in abortion debates.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To scrutinize Dworkin's novel argument that abortion rights are rooted in the religious notion of sacred human life.
    • To probe the radical consequences of Dworkin's proposed constitutional basis for abortion rights.
    • To identify and explain a flaw in the constitutional test for abortion regulations introduced in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

    Main Methods:

    Keywords:
    Analytical ApproachFirst AmendmentGenetics and ReproductionLegal ApproachPlanned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. CaseyRight to Life Movement

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Critical analysis of Ronald Dworkin's legal and philosophical arguments concerning abortion.
  • Close examination of the majority opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey and its constitutional standard.
  • Comparative legal reasoning to connect Dworkin's theories with the Casey decision's implications.

    • Main Results:

    • Argues that Dworkin's framework, while seeking a textual home for abortion rights in the First Amendment's religion clauses, leads to more radical implications than he acknowledges.
    • Identifies a significant flaw in the constitutional standard established by Planned Parenthood v. Casey for evaluating abortion regulations.
    • Suggests a connection between the flaw in Casey's standard and Dworkin's hesitation to fully develop his own argument.

    Conclusions:

    • Dworkin's attempt to ground abortion rights in the concept of sacred life has unforeseen and potentially destabilizing consequences for abortion jurisprudence.
    • The constitutional test in Planned Parenthood v. Casey is constitutionally flawed, necessitating a re-evaluation of abortion regulations.
    • Further legal and philosophical inquiry is needed to reconcile the concepts of religious value, constitutional rights, and abortion access.