Reproductive Laws for the 1990s

  • Sherrill Cohen
  • Nadine Taub

Table of contents

  1. Front Matter
    Pages i-x
  2. The Social Context for Reproductive Laws

    1. Front Matter
      Pages 1-1
    2. Sherrill Cohen, Nadine Taub
      Pages 3-10
  3. Reproduction and Access to Health Care: A Legislator’s View

    1. Front Matter
      Pages 11-11
    2. George Miller
      Pages 13-20
  4. Society and Reproduction

    1. Front Matter
      Pages 21-21
    2. Laurie Nsiah-Jefferson
      Pages 23-67
    3. Adrienne Asch
      Pages 69-124
  5. Reproductive Policy Position Papers and Commentaries for the 1990s

    1. Front Matter
      Pages 125-125
    2. Prenatal and Neonatal Technology, Abortion, and Birth

      1. Nan D. Hunter
        Pages 129-153
      2. Mary Sue Henifin, Ruth Hubbard, Judy Norsigian
        Pages 155-183
      3. Janet Gallagher
        Pages 185-235
      4. Jeannie I. Rosoff
        Pages 237-240
      5. Alan R. Fleischman
        Pages 249-257
    3. Reproductive Choice: Hazards and Interference

      1. Joan E. Bertin
        Pages 277-305
      2. Nancy Gertner
        Pages 307-328
      3. Robert Abrams
        Pages 329-330
      4. Edmund D. Cooke Jr., Sally J. Kenney
        Pages 331-339
      5. Helen Rodriguez-Trias
        Pages 353-358
    4. Alternative Forms of Reproduction

  6. Back Matter
    Pages 441-472

About this book


The Project on Reproductive Laws for the 1990s began in 1985 with the realization that reports of scientific developments and new technologies were stimulating debates and discussions among bioethicists and policymakers, and that women had little part in those discussions either as participants or as a group with interests to be considered. With the help of a planning grant from the Rutgers University Institute for Research on Women, the Women's Rights Litigation Clinic at Rutgers University Law School-Newark held a planning meeting that June attended by approximately 20 theorists and activists in the area of reproductive rights. Project purposes, methods, and general shape took form at the meeting. Two goals have characterized the Project's work since then: first, to generate discussion, debate, and, where possible, consensus among those committed to reproductive autonomy and gender equality as to how best to respond to the questions raised by re­ ported advances in reproductive and neonatal technology and new modes of reproduction; and second, to ensure that those shaping reproductive law and policy appreciate the ramifications of these developments for gender equality. In meeting this twofold agenda, the Project focused on six areas: time limits on abortion; prenatal screening; fetus as patient; reproductive hazards in the workplace; interference with reproductive choice; and alternative modes of reproduction. The Project identified individuals to take respon­ sibility for drafting model legislation and position papers in the six areas (for the drafters, see the Appendix).


autonomy health reproduction

Editors and affiliations

  • Sherrill Cohen
    • 1
  • Nadine Taub
    • 1
  1. 1.Women’s Rights Litigation ClinicRutgers University School of Law-NewarkUSA

Bibliographic information