Advertisement

Abortion, Sexual Markets and the Law

  • Helen M. AlvaréEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Philosophy and Medicine book series (PHME, volume 111)

Abstract

There can be little doubt that information and evidence regarding the shared humanity of the unborn child has moved citizens and lawmakers in the United States to oppose abortion and to take steps to protect unborn children. Evidence about the development of unborn human life is a regular part of hearings before legislative bodies considering legal restrictions on abortion. Fundraising dinners for “crisis pregnancy centers” inevitably feature personal testimony from client-mothers, who speak about how they came to understand and accept the value of their child’s life.

Keywords

Abortion Rate Marriage Market Plan Parenthood Unborn Child Mating Market 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. ABC News Entertainment, “Stars’ Sex Secrets.” http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/slideshow/celebrities-sexual-experiences-7389796, slide 2. Accessed 29 Nov 2010.
  2. Abortion Control Act, 18 Pennsylvania Code Section § 3213.Google Scholar
  3. Aka v. Jefferson Hospital Ass’n Inc. 344 Ark. 627, 42 S.W.3d 508, 515, n. 2 (2001).Google Scholar
  4. Akerlof, George A., Janet L. Yellen, and Michael L. Katz. 1996. An analysis of out-of wedlock childbearing in the United States. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 111(2): 277–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alan Guttmacher Institute. (1 November 2010). An overview of abortion laws. New York, NY: Guttmacher Institute. http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_OAL.pdf. Accessed 13 Nov 2010.
  6. Alan Guttmacher Institute. (May 2010). In brief: Facts on induced abortion in the United States, at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html.
  7. Alan Guttmacher Institute. State Bans on Partial Birth Abortion as of August 1, 2010. Menlo Park, CA: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, August 1, 2010. http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparetable.jsp?cat=10&ind=461. Accessed 15 Nov 2010.
  8. Alvaré, Helen M. 2004. Saying “yes” before saying “i do”: Premarital sex and cohabitation as a piece of the divorce puzzle. Notre Dame Journal of Law Ethics & Public Policy 18(1): 7–88.Google Scholar
  9. Alvaré, Helen M. (2011). Beyond the sex-ed wars: Disadvantaged single mothers’ search for community. Akron Law Review 168(2011).Google Scholar
  10. Arizona Revised Statutes § 36-2301.01(A)(4)).Google Scholar
  11. Arkansas Code Annotated. § 5-61-201 (2010) and, § 20-16-1203 (2010).Google Scholar
  12. Born Alive Infant Protection Act (2002), 1 U.S.C. §8 (Pub. L. 107-207).Google Scholar
  13. Brief for Appellees, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Cir., No. 10-16696, (Sept. 17, 2010).Google Scholar
  14. Brinig, Margaret F. 2008. Children’s beliefs and family law. Emory Law Journal 58: 55–70.Google Scholar
  15. Brinig, Margaret F., and Douglas F. Allen. 2000. These boots are made for walking: Why most divorce filers are women. American Law and Economics Review 2: 126–169.Google Scholar
  16. Brinn, Dr. Steven, M.D. (27 November 2010). Letter to the editor: Pediatricians object to neighboring abortion clinic. Cincinnati Inquirer, at http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2010/11/27/pediatricians-object-to-neighboring-abortion-clinic.
  17. Buechler, Steven M. 1990. Women’s movements in the United States: Woman suffrage, equal rights, and beyond. Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Cabezón, Carlos, et al. 2005. Adolescent pregnancy prevention: an abstinence-centered randomized controlled intervention in a Chilean public high school. Journal of Adolescent Health 36: 64–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. California Health & Safety Code § 123420 (enacted 1995).Google Scholar
  20. Campbell, Anne. 2008. The morning after the night before: Affective reactions to one-night stands among mated and unmated women and men. Human Nature 19(2): 157–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (May 29, 2009). Key Statistics from the National Survey of Family Growth, at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm.
  22. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (September 27, 2002). “Trends in sexual risk behaviors among high school students–United States, 1991–2001,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 51(38): 856–859, at http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5138a2.htm (January 22, 2007).
  23. Center for Genetics and Society, History of Human Genetic and Reproductive Technologies. At http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=3157.
  24. County Executive of Prince George’s County v. Doe, 291 Md. 676.Google Scholar
  25. Edin, Kathryn & Kefalas, Maria. 2005. Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  26. England, Paula & Edin, Kathryn eds. 2007. Unmarried Couples With Children. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Ertelt, Steven. July 16, 2007. Louisiana first to ban partial birth abortions after Supreme Court Ruling. Washington, DC: Lifenews.com. At: http://www.lifenews.com/2007/07/16/state-2375/. Accessed 15 November 2010.
  28. Finer, Lawrence B., et al. 2005. Reasons U.S. women have abortions, quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 37(3): 110–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gallagher, Maggie. 1999. The age of unwed mothers: Is teen pregnancy the problem. Institute for American Values. At http://www.americanvalues.org/Teen.PDF.
  30. Gilbert, Kathleen. (23 February 2009). Arkansas enshrines partial birth abortion ban into state law. Front Royal, VA: Lifesitenews.com, at: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09022301.html. Accessed 15 Nov 2010.
  31. Glenn, Norval D. Against Family Fatalism, Jan 21, 2008 at Cato Unbound, at: cato-unbound.org/2008/01/21/norval-d-glenn/against-family-fatalism/.Google Scholar
  32. Goodwin, P.Y., W.D. Mosher, and A. Chandra. 2010. Marriage and cohabitation in the United States: A statistical portrait based on Cycle 6 (2002) of the National Survey of Family Growth. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Statistics 23 (28). At: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_028.pdf.
  33. Guzzo, Karen Benjamin. 2006. How do marriage market conditions affect entrance into cohabitation vs. marriage? Social Science Research 35: 349–351.Google Scholar
  34. Haskell, Dr. Martin. 1992. Dilation and extraction for late second trimester abortion. In Second trimester abortion: From every Angle, Fall Risk Management Seminar, September 13–14, 1992. Dallas, TX: National Abortion Federation, 29–31 At: http://eileen.250x.com/Main/7_R_Eile/Haskell_Desc.html.Google Scholar
  35. Henshaw, Stanley K., and Kathryn Kost. 2008. Trends in the characteristics of women obtaining abortions, 1974–2004. NY: Alan Guttmacher Institute.Google Scholar
  36. Hymowitz, Kay S. 2006. Marriage and Caste in America: Separate and unequal families in a post-marital age. Chicago, IL: Ivan R. Dee Publisher.Google Scholar
  37. Idaho Code. 1998. § 18-613.Google Scholar
  38. Indiana Code Annotated. (Burns) § 16-34-2-1(b), enacted 1997.Google Scholar
  39. Iowa Code. 1998. § 707.8A.Google Scholar
  40. Kansas Statutes Annotated. § 65-443 to § 65-444.Google Scholar
  41. Kenney, Catherine T., and Sara S. McLanahan. 2006. Why are cohabiting relationships more violent than marriages. Demography 43(1): 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kentucky Revised Statute § 311.765 (2010); effective 1998.Google Scholar
  43. Kissling, Frances. 2010. How to think about abortion. Salon.com. http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/11/16/thinking_about_abortion/index.html. Accessed 25 Feb 2011.
  44. Klaus, Hanna, Nora Dennehy, and Jean Turnbull. (21 October 2001). Undergirding abstinence within a sexuality education program. Teen Pregnancy Prevention Conference, Penn State University, Oct 21, 2001. (On file with the author).Google Scholar
  45. Klick, Jonathan, and Thomas Stratmann. 2006. Abortion access and risky sex among teens: Parental involvement laws and sexually transmitted diseases, at http://www.yeson4.net/pdf/ParentalInvolvementAndSTDReduction.pdf.
  46. Kristof, Nicholas D. At risk from the womb. The New York Times, Oct 2, 2010.Google Scholar
  47. Lander, E.S., L.M. Linton, B. Birren, et al. (February 2001). Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature 409(6822): 860–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Layte, Richard, and Hannah McGee. 2007. Regret about the timing of first sexual intercourse: The role of age and context. Working Paper no. 217. Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).Google Scholar
  49. LexisNexis. 2010. LexisNexis 50 State Comparative Legislation/Regulation: Abortion.Google Scholar
  50. Louisiana Revised Statute. 14:87.5.Google Scholar
  51. Maine Revised Statutes. Title 22, Health and Welfare. Chapter 263-B § 1594Google Scholar
  52. Manning, Wendy D., Monica A. Longmore, and Peggy C. Giordano. 2007. The changing institution of marriage: Adolescents’ expectations to cohabit and to marry. Journal of Marriage & Family 69(3): 559–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Maryland HEALTH-GENERAL Code Ann. § 20-214.Google Scholar
  54. Medical Practice Act. 24 Delaware Code § 1791.Google Scholar
  55. Meier, Ann M. 2007. Adolescents’ first sex and subsequent mental health. American Journal of Sociology 112(6): 1811–181847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Michailidis, G.D., P. Papageorgiou, and D.L. Economides. (March 2002). Assessment of fetal anatomy in the first trimester using two- and three-dimensional ultrasound. The British Journal of Radiology 75(891): 215–219.Google Scholar
  57. Michigan Compiled Laws § 333.17015(5). (MI. 2010).Google Scholar
  58. Michigan Compiled Laws, § 333.17015. (MI. 2010).Google Scholar
  59. Michigan Department of Community Health. “Abortion Procedures,” http://www.michigan.gov/mdch/0,1607,7-132-2940_4909_6437_19077-46328-,00.html. Accessed 1 Mar 2011.
  60. Midtown Hosp. v. Miller, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1360 (N.D. Ga. 1998).Google Scholar
  61. Miller v. Am. Infertility Group of Ill., 386 Ill. App. 3d 141 (2008).Google Scholar
  62. Minnesota Statute § 145.42.Google Scholar
  63. Mississippi Code Annotated. 1997. § 41-41-73.Google Scholar
  64. Montana Code Annotated. 1999. § 50-20-401.Google Scholar
  65. Moore, Kristin A., et al. 1995. Adolescent sex, contraception, and childbearing: A review of recent research. Washington, DC: Child Trends.Google Scholar
  66. NARAL Pro-Choice America. 2010. Colorado: Refusal to Provide Medical Services. http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/government-and-you/state-governments/state-profiles/colorado.html?templateName=template-161602701&issueID=14&ssumID=2495. Accessed 18 Nov 2010.
  67. New Jersey Statute. § 2A:65A-6; enacted in 1997;Google Scholar
  68. New Mexico Statute Ann. § 30-5-2.Google Scholar
  69. New Mexico Statute Annotated. § 30-5A-3 (2010); enacted in 2000;Google Scholar
  70. New, Michael. 2007. Analyzing the effect of state legislation on the incidence of abortion among minors, (Heritage Foundation, Center For Analysis Data Report #07-01). http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/02/analyzing-the-effect-of-state-legislation-on-the-incidence-of-abortion-among-minors.
  71. “New York Times Magazine examines views about fetal pain, effects on abortion policy,” Medical News Today, February 13, 2008. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/97051.php. Accessed 14 Nov 2010.
  72. North Dakota Cent. Code, § 14-02.6-02; enacted in 1999.Google Scholar
  73. Oakley, Ann. 1986. The history of ultrasonography in obstetrics. Birth 13(1): 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Official Code of Georgia Annotated. 2010. §16-12-144.Google Scholar
  75. Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnership. Reducing unintended pregnancies, supporting maternal and child health, and reducing the need for abortion. WhiteHouse.gov at http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ofbnp/policy/commonground.
  76. Ohio Revised Code Annotated. 2919.151, effective August 2000.Google Scholar
  77. Ohio Revised Code,  Chap. 37: 3702.30 “Ambulatory Surgical Facilities” (2009).
  78. Operation Rescue. (June 11, 2010). Alabama abortion mill to close down rather than clean up. http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/alabama-abortion-mill-to-close-down-rather-than-clean-up/;
  79. Operation Rescue. (6 December 2009). Project Daniel 5:25 – numbering the days of legal abortion. http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/project-daniel-525-numbering-the-days-of-legal-abortion/.
  80. Oregon Revised Statutes § 435.225 (2009).Google Scholar
  81. Paul, Annie Murphy. 2010. Origins: How the nine months before birth shape the rest of our lives. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  82. Peterson, Gary W. 2005. Family influences on adolescent development. In Handbook of adolescent behavior problems: Evidence-based approaches to prevention and treatment, eds. Thomas P. Gullotta and Gerald R. Adams, 27–55. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  83. Planned Parenthood, Inc. v. Miller, 195 F.3d 386, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 23166 (8th Cir. Iowa 1999).Google Scholar
  84. Planned Parenthood of Illinois, “History of Born Alive Legislation in Illinois,” Chicago, IL: [publication date unknown]. http://factcheck.barackobama.com/PP%20Born%20Alive%20History.pdf. Accessed 17 Nov 2010.
  85. Presley v Newport Hospital (1976, RI) 365 A2d 748, 84 ALR3d 391.Google Scholar
  86. Pritchett, Lant. “Swimming? Smoking? Solving? Intellectual History of the Population control Movement, “Author meets his critics”: Matthew Connelly, Fatal Misconception,” PAA, New Orleans, April 18, 2008, at http://slidefinder.net/s/swimming_smoking_solving_intellectual_history/12219909 (italics original).
  87. Reichert, Timothy. 2010. Bitter Pill. First Things May: 25–34.Google Scholar
  88. Regnerus, Mark D. 2007. Forbidden fruit: Sex and religion in the lives of America’s teenagers. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  89. Revised Code Washington (ARCW) § 9.02.150.Google Scholar
  90. Rindfuss, Ronald R., and Audrey VandenHeuvel. 1990. Cohabitation: A precursor to marriage or an alternative to being single? Population & Development Review 16(4): 703–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. R.R.S. Nebraska. § 28-328; first enacted in 1997 with amendments in 2007 and 2008;Google Scholar
  92. Senate Bill 793, 95th Gen. Assem., 2d Reg. Sess. (Mo. 2010).Google Scholar
  93. Sexual Rights Initiative and Youth Coalition for Sexual and Reproductive Rights. (18 October 2010). “Written Contribution to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural rights on the Occasion of the Day of General Discussion on “The right to sexual and reproductive health” (15 November 2010).”Google Scholar
  94. Stanek, Jill. Testimony of Jill Stanek before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, Hearing on H.R.4292, The "Born-Alive Infant Protection Act of 2000,” Thursday, July 20, 2000.Google Scholar
  95. Stanley, Scott, et al. 2006. Sliding versus deciding: Inertia and the pre-marital cohabitation effect. Family Relations 55: 499–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Stevenson, Betsey, and Justin Wolfers. 2009. The paradox of declining female happiness. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 1(2): 190–225. At http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/pol.1.2.190.Google Scholar
  97. South Dakota Codified Laws § 34-23A-10.3.Google Scholar
  98. St. Agnes Hosp. v. Riddick, 748 F. Supp. 319 (D. Md. 1990).Google Scholar
  99. Sullins, D. Paul. 2003. Abortion and family formation: Circumstance or culture? Life and Learning 13: 31–64.Google Scholar
  100. Texas Health & Safety Code § 171.012(a)(2)(D),  § 171.014 , § 171.016.Google Scholar
  101. The National Marriage Project & The Institute for American Values. (6 December 2010). The State of Our Unions: Marriage in America 2010: When Marriage Disappears: The New Middle America. At http://stateofourunions.org/2010/SOOU2010.pdf.
  102. U.S. Census Bureau. 2007. America’s Families and Living Arrangements 2007, Table C 3: Living Arrangements of Children Under 18 Years and Marital Status of Parents by Age, Sex, Race plus Hispanic Origin, and Selected Characteristics of the Child for All Children, <http://www.census.gov/population/view/socdemo/hh-fam/cps2007.html.> (January 2, 2009).
  103. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Programs for Replication—Intervention Implementation Reports (2010), at http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/prevention/research/programs/index.html.
  104. U. S. Supreme Court. 1965. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479.Google Scholar
  105. U.S. Supreme Court. 1973. Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113.Google Scholar
  106. U.S. Supreme Court. 1992. Casey v. Planned Parenthood 505 U.S. 833.Google Scholar
  107. U.S. Supreme Court. 2000. Stenberg v. Carhart 530 U.S. 914.Google Scholar
  108. U.S. Supreme Court. 2003. Lawrence v. Texas 539 U.S. 558, 567.Google Scholar
  109. U.S. Supreme Court. 2007. Gonzales v. Carhart 550 U.S. 124.Google Scholar
  110. Ventura, Stephanie J. (May 2009). Changing Patterns of Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States. US Dept. of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics), NCHS Data Brief, No. 18.Google Scholar
  111. Ventura, Stephanie J. et al. (14 October 2009). Estimated pregnancy rates for the United States, 1990–2005: An update. National Vital Statistics Report 58(4). http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_04.pdf.
  112. Weaver, Andrew J., Judith A. Samford, Virginia J. Morgan, David B. Larson, Harold G. Koenig, and Kevin J. Flannelly. 2002. A systematic review of research on religion in six primary marriage and family journals: 1995–1999. American Journal of Family Therapy 30(4): 293–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. West Virginia Code § 16-2F-7.Google Scholar
  114. Wydick, Bruce. 2007. Grandma was right: Why cohabitation undermines relational satisfaction but is increasing anyway. Kyklos 60(4): 617–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.George Mason University School of LawArlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations