Rethinking Roe v. Wade: defending the abortion right in the face of contemporary opposition

Area of Science:

• Bioethics
• Legal Philosophy
• Political Science

Background:

• Many states proposed Human Life Amendments in 2008 to define personhood from fertilization.
• Such amendments could potentially lead to the repeal of Roe v. Wade, impacting abortion rights.
• There is a need for legal arguments defending abortion rights that remain effective even with Human Life Amendments.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the robustness of J.J. Thomson's "A Defense of Abortion" argument.
• To determine if Thomson's argument can successfully defend abortion rights irrespective of Human Life Amendments.
• To analyze the alignment of Thomson's central thesis with existing U.S. legal policies.

Main Methods:

• Philosophical analysis of J.J. Thomson's "A Defense of Abortion" argument.
• Examination of the implications of Human Life Amendments on abortion legality.
• Comparison of Thomson's thesis with established legal principles in the U.S.A.

Main Results:

• Thomson's argument provides a defense for abortion rights that withstands the potential passage of Human Life Amendments.
• The core of Thomson's argument—that the right to life does not necessitate the right to use another's body—is a strong legal and ethical position.
• This central thesis is demonstrably present in various legal policies across the United States.

Conclusions:

• J.J. Thomson's "A Defense of Abortion" offers a resilient framework for protecting abortion rights.
• The argument's strength lies in its alignment with existing legal concepts of bodily autonomy and individual rights.
• This philosophical defense is crucial for navigating legal challenges to abortion access, particularly in the context of personhood amendments.