“If You Prick Us, Do We Not Bleed?”: Of Shylock, Fetuses, and the Concept of Person in the Law
- 28 April 1983
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Law, Medicine and Health Care
- Vol. 11 (2), 52-64
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720x.1983.tb00814.x
Abstract
The focus of the abortion debate in the United States tends to be on whether and at what stage a fetus is a person. I believe this tendency has been unfortunate and counterproductive. Instead of advancing dialogue between opposing sides, such a focus seems to have stunted it, leaving advocates in the sort of I did not—You did too impasse we remember from childhood. Also reminiscent of that childhood scene has been the vain attempt to break the impasse by appeal to a higher authority. Thus, the pro-choice forces hoped they had proved the pro-life forces wrong by having had the Supreme Court of the United States decide inRoev. Wade that a fetus is not a person for purposes of the fourteenth amendment. Now the pro-life forces are trying to prove the pro-choice forces wrong by passing legislation or a constitutional amendment that declares a fetus to be a person after allKeywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- Morality and LegalityFamily Planning Perspectives, 1982
- When Does Life Begin?The Sciences, 1981
- Legal Status of the FetusPublished by Springer Nature ,1976
- A Defense of AbortionPublished by Springer Nature ,1971
- THE SERVICES.The Lancet, 1897