|
KMID : 1025620210240030287
|
|
Korean Journal of Medical Ethics
2021 Volume.24 No. 3 p.287 ~ p.302
|
|
|
Constitutional Discordance Adjudication on Criminal Abortion and the Right to Self-determination: Focusing on the discourse of ‘liberty as non-domination’
|
|
Kim Moon-Jeong
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
Abortion is both a personal issue and a social problem. It should be viewed from a holistic point of view, one that takes into account, not only the decisions women make to terminate or continue pregnancies, but also their decisions concerning childbirth and nurturing. The dichotomous “pro-choice versus pro-life” debate is incapable of resolving the complex social and ethical issues associated with abortion. Moreover, discussions of the right to life of an embryo/fetus typically assume a controversial hierarchy of rights as well as a questionable concept of normality. And confusion between the right to life and protection of life raises new challenges in the policy debates concerning abortion. Liberty as non-domination is not something that one can enjoy as an isolated atomic entity. Rather, it is only in its relation to fellow citizens and the state that one can experience such freedom. Liberty as non-domination also emphasizes the state's civic responsibility to accept, and appropriately respond to, constructive criticism. This article advances the view that the ideal of liberty as non-domination has implications for abortion. Among other things, it provides an ethical basis for understanding and enhancing reproductive rights, which are also human rights.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
abortion, Constitutional Discordance Adjudication, right to life, the right of self-determination, Philip Pettit, liberty as non-domination
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
 
|
|