Abstract
In this Article, I describe and examine the severe shortcomings in women's autonomy in the context of reproductive choices in the medical arena. The reproductive choices I explore are those choices that involve gestation: abortion, fertility treatments, and interventions during pregnancy. Due to state and medical interests in the fetus, I describe how information conveyed to patients making reproductive choices is biased towards fetal interests, relies on female stereotypes, and is still conveyed with the objective authority of the medical profession. Moreover, reproductive choices implicate women's values and identity interests that reach beyond medical concerns, which are not part of the informed consent doctrine at all. The narrow, individualistic informed consent torts doctrine intended to protect patient autonomy does not do enough in this context to balance bias nor does it mandate discussion of important identity interests and values. Accordingly, I argue that when faced with reproductive choices, women are not provided the balanced and comprehensive information needed to promote their autonomy.In response to the breakdown in patient autonomy I describe, instead of leaving women alone to make choices or regulating in order to protect them from their choices, a broader framework for supporting reproductive choices should be established. In light of the interdependence of woman and fetus, as well as the broader social context shaping these decisions, I argue that a more contextual, relational perspective of autonomy should be the goal of informed consent in the context of reproductive choices. I suggest a number of reforms that aim to optimize patient autonomy from a relational perspective. I suggest a broad, deliberative doctor-patient consultation and legal reforms that create more balance between the pull towards intervention and fetal protection on the one hand, and non-intervention and protection of women's personal identity interests on the other.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,General Medicine,Health(social science)
Reference106 articles.
1. The Second Revolution in Informed Consent: Comparing Physicians to Each Other;Twerski;NW. U. L. REV.,1999
2. Rethinking Informed Consent: The Case for Shared Decision Making;Moulton;AM. J.L. and MED.,2006
3. Infected Judgment: Legal Responses to Physician Bias;Crossley;VILL. L. REV.,2003
4. Unethical Female Stereotyping in Reproductive Health;Cook;INT’L J. GYNECOLOGY and OBSTETRICS,2010
5. Theorizing Yes: An Essay on Feminism, Law, and Desire
Cited by
20 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献