Abortion Rights

  • J. Thomas CookEmail author


For the past 50 years abortion rights have been a focus of ethical, legal, political and religious controversy. Traditional opposition to the procedure viewed it simply as unjustified homicide. This view came under critical scrutiny in the 1960s as philosophers and legal scholars marshaled arguments to show that this conventional assessment was mistaken. This chapter recounts highlights of the controversy, citing the contributions of applied ethicists, courts and legislatures. The final section considers ways in which the still-controversial status of abortion complicates the ethical and legal context when a pre-natal diagnosis of critical congenital heart defect requires a decision on continuation or termination of the pregnancy.


Abortion Pregnancy termination Roe vs. Wade Critical congenital heart disease Maternal-fetal conflict Informed consent Comfort care Early and late term abortion Personhood 


  1. 1.
    Riddle JM. Contraception and abortion from the ancient world to the renaissance. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1992.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lloyd GER. In: Chadwick, Mann WN, editors. Hippocratic writings. New York: Penguin; 1952.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Warren MA. On the moral and legal status of abortion. Monist. 1973;57(4):1–11.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brody B. Abortion and the sanctity of human life: a philosophical view. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1975.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tooley M. Abortion and infanticide. Philos Public Aff. 1972;2(1):37–65.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Warren MA. Do potential people have moral rights? Can J Philos. 1977;7(2):275–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thomson JJ. A defense of abortion. Philos Public Aff. 1971;1(1):47–66.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Williams R. Abortion, potential and value. Utilitas. 2008;20:169–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schwarz S. The moral question of abortion. Chicago: Loyola University Press; 1990.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pence GE. Medical ethics: accounts of the cases that shaped and define medical ethics. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2008.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Today in Civil Liberties History (for May 21, 1959). Available at
  12. 12.
    Griswold v. Connecticut. 381 U.S. 479. 1965.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roe v. Wade. 410 U.S. 113. 1973.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Webster v. Reproductive health services. 492 U.S. 490. 1989.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Planned Parenthood v. Casey. 505 U.S. 833. 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mervosh S. Georgia is latest state to pass fetal heartbeat bill as part of growing trend, New York Times, March 30, 2019.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Law T. Here are the details of the abortion legislation in Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and elsewhere. Time Magazine, May 18, 2019. Available at
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    An overview of abortion laws as of September 1, 2019. The Gutmacher Institute’s website. Available at
  20. 20.
    Munson R. The “partial birth abortion” controversy in intervention and reflection: basic issues in medical ethics. 8th ed. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth; 2008. p. 565–9.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Abortion surveillance, United States, 2015. MMWR. 2018;67(13):1–45.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guttmacher Institute. Induced abortion in the United States: September 2019 fact sheet. Available at
  23. 23.
    Bensemlali M, et al. Discordances between pre-natal and post-natal diagnoses of congenital heart diseases and impact on care strategies. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68(9):921–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Termination of pregnancy after the diagnosis of an abnormality (more than 20 weeks gestation) Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals, NHS Trust. Available at
  25. 25.
    Montanaro D. Poll: majority want to keep abortion legal, but they also want restrictions. NPR June 7, 2019. Available at
  26. 26.
    Carlssen T, Bergman G, et al. Experiences of informational needs and received information following a prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart defect. Prenat Diagn. 2016;36(6):515–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sandelowski M, Barroso J. The travesty of choosing after positive prenatal diagnosis. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2005;34(3):307–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cohen JK. HHS finalizes faith-based protections for healthcare workers. Modern Healthcare, May 2, 2019. Available at

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyRollins CollegeWinter ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations