Reproductive Laws for the 1990s

The Project on Reproductive Laws for the 1990s began in 1985 with the realization that reports of scientific developments and new technologies were stimulating debates and discussions among bioethicists and policymakers, and that women had little part in those discussions either as participants or as a group with interests to be considered. With the help of a planning grant from the Rutgers University Institute for Research on Women, the Women's Rights Litigation Clinic at Rutgers University Law School-Newark held a planning meeting that June attended by approximately 20 theorists and activists in the area of reproductive rights. Project purposes, methods, and general shape took form at the meeting. Two goals have characterized the Project's work since then: first, to generate discussion, debate, and, where possible, consensus among those committed to reproductive autonomy and gender equality as to how best to respond to the questions raised by re ported advances in reproductive and neonatal technology and new modes of reproduction; and second, to ensure that those shaping reproductive law and policy appreciate the ramifications of these developments for gender equality. In meeting this twofold agenda, the Project focused on six areas: time limits on abortion; prenatal screening; fetus as patient; reproductive hazards in the workplace; interference with reproductive choice; and alternative modes of reproduction. The Project identified individuals to take respon sibility for drafting model legislation and position papers in the six areas (for the drafters, see the Appendix).

Résumé
"A timely topic of concern to all Americans...well argued, cogent, and... persuasive... An excellent sourcebook on the ethical questions that [society] must confront if [it is] to continue to develop and use new reproductive technologies." -Choice

Contenu
I. The Social Context for Reproductive Laws.- Introduction, Working Group of the Project on Reproductive Laws for the 1990s.- II. Reproduction and Access to Health Care: A Legislator's View.- Reproduction and Access to Health Care.- III. Society and Reproduction.- Reproductive Laws, Women of Color, and Low-Income Women.- Reproductive Technology and Disability.- IV. Reproductive Policy Position Papers and Commentaries for the 1990s.- 1. Prenatal and Neonatal Technology, Abortion, and Birth.- Position Paper: Time Limits on Abortion.- Position Paper: Prenatal Screening.- Position Paper: Fetus as Patient.- Commentary: Hard Cases and Reproductive Rights.- Commentary: Disability Rights Perspectives on Reproductive Technologies and Public Policy.- Commentary: The Fetus Is a Patient.- Commentary: Reconciling Offspring and Maternal Interests during Pregnancy.- 2. Reproductive Choice: Hazards and Interference.- Position Paper: Reproductive Hazards in the Workplace.- Position Paper: Interference with Reproductive Choice.- Commentary: An Attorney General's Outlook.- Commentary: The View from Capitol Hill.- Commentary: Protective Legislation and Occupational Hazards: Flawed Science and Poor Policies.- Commentary: A Model for Advocacy: From Proposals to Policy.- 3. Alternative Forms of Reproduction.- Position Paper: Alternative Modes of Reproduction.- Position Paper: Alternative Modes of Reproduction: Other Views and Questions.- Commentary: Regulating the New Reproductive Technologies.- Commentary: Alternative Modes of Reproduction: The Locus and Determinants of Choice.- Commentary: The Key Social Issues Posed by the New Reproductive Technologies: A Physician's Perspective.- Working Group.- Advisory Committee.- Notes on Contributors.- Table of Cases.