My body, still my choice: an objection to Hendricks on abortion

Journal of Medical Ethics 49 (2):145-145 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In ‘My body, not my choice: against legalised abortion’, Hendricks offers an intriguing argument that suggests the state can coerce pregnant women into continuing to sustain their fetuses. His argument consists partly in countering Boonin’s defence of legalised abortion, followed by an argument from analogy. I argue in this response article that his argument from analogy fails and, correspondingly, it should still be a woman’s legal choice to have an abortion. My key point concerns the burdensomeness of pregnancy which is morally relevant to the question of whether the state can coerce people to use their bodies to help another person.

Author's Profile

Kyle van Oosterum
University of Oxford


Added to PP

740 (#22,360)

6 months
177 (#19,380)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?