Abstract
Corporate fetal protection policies are designed to protect unborn children from exposure to harmful substances in the workplace. In recent years, a number of corporations have instituted fetal protection policies which excluded all fertile female employees from jobs which exposed them to hazardous substances. Critics argued that these policies discriminated against women, and several lawsuits were filed.
The United States Supreme Court recently decided a case involving the fetal protection policy of Johnson Controls, Inc. This article will analyze the impact of the Supreme Court decision from a legal and ethical perspective. Practical guidelines for policies which protect the unborn and comply with the law will also be addressed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Ira Sprotzer, J. D., is an Associate Professor and Chairman of the Department of Business Policy and Environment at Rider College, Lawrenceville, N.J. Professor Sprotzer is a member of the New Jersey Bar and publishes research in the field of Employment Law.
Ilene V. Goldberg, J. D., is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Business Policy and Environment at Rider College, Lawrenceville, N.J. Professor Goldberg is a member of the New Jersey and Pennsylvania Bars and publishes research on topics related to Health Law.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sprotzer, I., Goldberg, I.V. Fetal protection: Law, ethics and corporate policy. J Bus Ethics 11, 731–735 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00872304
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00872304