The Jurisprudential Basis and Development Direction of Women's Abortion Rights: Based on the Current Legislation of the United States and France

Yunhan Jiao

doi:10.62051/ky15fe53

Authors

Yunhan Jiao

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62051/ky15fe53

Keywords:

Abortion right; jurisprudential basis; current legislation.

Abstract

The legislation of a country is determined by various social factors in the country, and the change of national legislation can reflect the change of the social background behind it. The legal basis of abortion rights is rooted in social conditions, and the development direction of abortion rights will continue to be more in line with national and social conditions. In 2022, the United States and France, which are also developed countries, took diametrically opposite approaches to the issue of abortion rights. This makes us wonder: why do the two countries have different attitudes towards the same issue? What happens to abortion rights in the future? In order to uncover the surface and deeply understand its connotation, this paper analyzes the legal basis and reasons behind the right to abortion in the United States and France, and compares the current legislation as well as typical cases of the two countries in this respect, strives to explore the legal basis and future development direction of female abortion rights.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Zhang Wenxian. Juristal Theory. Beijing: Peking University Press, 1999.

Abortion, BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY (10th ed. 2014).

Rolhn M. Perkins & Ronald N. Boyce. Criminal Law 186-87 (3d ed. 1982).

Shi Jiayou. The ethical and legal debate over abortion rights. Journal of China University of Political Science and Law, 2023(03).

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113,93 S.Ct. 705 (1973).

Wang Yuhan. The game between the life faction and the Choice faction: from the perspective of the "abortion case" in Akron in 1983. Journal of Liaoning University, Vol.51 No.4(Jul.2023).

Ronald M.Dworkin. Life's Dominion: An Argument About Abortion, Euthanasia, and in dividual Freedom, 38(Jul. 2009) .

John Locke，Two Treatises Of Civil Government, 1689, p.7.

Claire Conner, Wrapped in the Flag: A Personal History of America’s Radical Right, Boston: Beacon Press, 2013, p. 26.

John T. Noonan Jr. Abortion and the Catholic Church: A Summary History. Natural Law Forum, Vol.1, No.1, 1967, pp. 93-94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajj/12.1.85

John Riddle, Eve’s Herbs: A History of Contraception and Abortion in the West, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997, pp.157-238．

Paul A. David and Warren Sanders, “Rudimentary Contraceptive Methods and the American Transition Martial Fertility Control, 1855-1915”，in Long Term Factors in American Economic Growth，ed. by Stanley L．Engerman and Robert E. Gailman, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1986, pp. 307-391; Yasukichi Yasuba, Birth Rates of the White Population in the United States, 1800-1860, Baltimore:The John Hopkins University Press, 1961, p.11.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

Liu Han. From Roe to Overturning Roe: The Abortion Rights Controversy from a Global Perspective (1973-2022). Women's Studies Review, 2022, No. 4, p. 14.

Zhou Lingfang. Value Conflict and Choice of law: On the priority of Justice Value of law. Research in Ethics, 2011, vol.06, p.110.

Nils Hope and José Miola, Medical Ethics, Cambridge University Press, 2014, p.208.

Qu Xiangfei. The Constitutional Status of the fetus: German model and American model. Global Law Review, 2009, vol.31(06), p.76.