« Policy Analysis of Governmental Coercion in Reproductive Decision Making | Main | U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Review Oklahoma Personhood Case »
October 30, 2012
Opinion Piece Challenging Purported Appeals to Science in Support of "Fetal Pain" Abortion Bans
The New York Times - Opinionator: Can Neuroscience Challenge Roe v. Wade?, by William Egginton:
When I was asked this summer to serve as an expert witness in an appellate case that some think could lead to the next Supreme Court test of Roe v. Wade, I was surprised.
Rick Hearn is the attorney representing Jennie McCormack, an Idaho woman who was arrested for allegedly inducing her own abortion using mifepristone and misoprostol — two F.D.A.-approved drugs, also known as RU-486 — and for obtaining the drugs from another state over the Internet. While the case against Ms. McCormack has been dropped for lack of evidence, Mr. Hearn, who is also a doctor, is pursuing a related suit against an Idaho statute, the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” (Idaho Code, Section 18-501 through 18-510), and others like it that cite neuroscientific findings of pain sentience on the part of fetuses as a basis for prohibiting abortions even prior to viability. . . .
October 30, 2012 in Abortion, Abortion Bans, Bioethics, Fetal Rights, Science | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef017ee48e1f40970d
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Opinion Piece Challenging Purported Appeals to Science in Support of "Fetal Pain" Abortion Bans:

