Ectogestation and the Good Samaritan Argument

3Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Philosophical discussions concerning ectogestation are trending. And given that the Supreme Court of the United States overturned Roe v. Wade (1973) and Casey v. Planned Parenthood (1992), questions regarding the moral and legal status of abortion in light of the advent of ectogestation will likely continue to be of central importance in the coming years. If ectogestation can intersect with or even determine abortion policy in the future, then a new philosophical analysis of the legal status of abortion is both warranted and urgently needed. I argue that, even if there is no ‘moral’ right to fetal destruction once ectogestation becomes a reality, societies ought not to implement legal prohibitions on a pregnant person’s ability to safely obtain an abortion that results in fetal death because such laws are systemically misogynistic.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stratman, C. (2023). Ectogestation and the Good Samaritan Argument. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad012

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free