Dr Chloe Romanis elizabeth.c.romanis@durham.ac.uk
Associate Professor
‘Abortion & "Artificial Wombs": Would ‘artificial womb’ technology legally empower non-gestating genetic progenitors to participate in decisions about how to terminate a pregnancy?'
Romanis, Elizabeth Chloe
Authors
Abstract
‘Artificial womb’ technology is highly anticipated for the benefits it might have as an alternative to neonatal intensive care and for pregnant people. In the bioethical literature, it has been suggested that such technology will force us to rethink the ethics of abortion. Some scholars have suggested that a pregnant person may be entitled to end a pregnancy but, with the advent of ectogestation, they may not be unilaterally entitled to opt for an abortion where the other genetic progenitor does not agree. Following two high-profile cases in England and Wales in the late 70s and 80s, English law is clear that genetic progenitors who do not gestate have no say in abortion decisions. It might be argued, however, that ectogestation casts doubt on the exclusion of all claims by genetic progenitors. In this article, I assess what a legal challenge to a decision to opt for abortion might look like with the advent of this technology, by examining whether genetic progenitors have the locus standi or grounds to seek an injunction to prevent abortion. I argue that such a challenge is unlikely to be successful.
Citation
Romanis, E. C. (2021). ‘Abortion & "Artificial Wombs": Would ‘artificial womb’ technology legally empower non-gestating genetic progenitors to participate in decisions about how to terminate a pregnancy?'. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 8(1), https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsab011
Journal Article Type | Article |
---|---|
Acceptance Date | Feb 24, 2021 |
Online Publication Date | May 21, 2021 |
Publication Date | 2021-06 |
Deposit Date | Feb 25, 2021 |
Publicly Available Date | Oct 26, 2021 |
Journal | Journal of Law and the Biosciences |
Electronic ISSN | 2053-9711 |
Publisher | Oxford University Press |
Peer Reviewed | Peer Reviewed |
Volume | 8 |
Issue | 1 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsab011 |
Public URL | https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1251830 |
Files
Published Journal Article
(620 Kb)
PDF
Publisher Licence URL
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Copyright Statement
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Duke University School of Law, Harvard Law School, Oxford University Press, and Stanford Law School. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
You might also like
Death and the artificial placenta
(2024)
Journal Article
Medical Negligence
(2024)
Book Chapter
Framing a future research agenda for Medical Law International
(2024)
Journal Article
Downloadable Citations
About Durham Research Online (DRO)
Administrator e-mail: dro.admin@durham.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
SheetJS Community Edition
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
PDF.js
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Font Awesome
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2024
Advanced Search