关于怀孕和母性。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q1 LAW Medical Law Review Pub Date : 2023-02-27 DOI:10.1093/medlaw/fwac030
Zaina Mahmoud, Elizabeth Chloe Romanis
{"title":"关于怀孕和母性。","authors":"Zaina Mahmoud,&nbsp;Elizabeth Chloe Romanis","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwac030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In English law, legal motherhood is allocated to the person who gestated. However, we argue that gestation-legally denoted as the \"natural\" source of parenting obligations-is often constructed as mothering, rather than the precursor to it. This means that women and pregnant people are treated as mothers prior to birth in legal and medical contexts. Since legal motherhood is an important status, defining the role an individual plays in a child's life, the conflation of gestation and motherhood does not reflect that, legally, a fetus does not have personhood. This blurring between gestation and motherhood is metaphysically incoherent, as a fetus is not an entity that can be parented. This conflation poses a real harm to pregnant people's autonomy, specifically those who do not intend to parent or who do not identify as women. More broadly, the medico-legal conflation of gestation and mothering is autonomy-limiting for all pregnant people as, resultantly, they may be coerced into obstetric intervention through legal processes. We argue for a better recognition of the differences between gestation and mothering, to promote autonomy and reflect the very different ways families may be formed.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"31 1","pages":"109-140"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9969408/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ON GESTATION AND MOTHERHOOD.\",\"authors\":\"Zaina Mahmoud,&nbsp;Elizabeth Chloe Romanis\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/medlaw/fwac030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In English law, legal motherhood is allocated to the person who gestated. However, we argue that gestation-legally denoted as the \\\"natural\\\" source of parenting obligations-is often constructed as mothering, rather than the precursor to it. This means that women and pregnant people are treated as mothers prior to birth in legal and medical contexts. Since legal motherhood is an important status, defining the role an individual plays in a child's life, the conflation of gestation and motherhood does not reflect that, legally, a fetus does not have personhood. This blurring between gestation and motherhood is metaphysically incoherent, as a fetus is not an entity that can be parented. This conflation poses a real harm to pregnant people's autonomy, specifically those who do not intend to parent or who do not identify as women. More broadly, the medico-legal conflation of gestation and mothering is autonomy-limiting for all pregnant people as, resultantly, they may be coerced into obstetric intervention through legal processes. We argue for a better recognition of the differences between gestation and mothering, to promote autonomy and reflect the very different ways families may be formed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Law Review\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"109-140\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9969408/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwac030\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwac030","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在英国法律中,法定的母性被分配给怀孕的人。然而,我们认为,怀孕——法律上被认为是养育子女义务的“自然”来源——通常被构建为养育子女,而不是养育子女的前兆。这意味着在法律和医疗方面,妇女和孕妇在出生前被视为母亲。由于法律上的母性是一种重要的地位,定义了一个人在孩子的生活中所扮演的角色,因此将妊娠和母性混为一谈并不反映胎儿在法律上没有人格。这种妊娠和母性之间的模糊在形而上学上是不连贯的,因为胎儿不是一个可以被养育的实体。这种混淆对孕妇的自主权造成了真正的伤害,特别是那些不打算生育或不认为自己是女性的孕妇。更广泛地说,对所有孕妇来说,将怀孕和生育混为一谈是一种自主限制,因此,她们可能被迫通过法律程序进行产科干预。我们主张更好地认识怀孕和育儿之间的差异,以促进自主权,并反映家庭可能形成的截然不同的方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
ON GESTATION AND MOTHERHOOD.

In English law, legal motherhood is allocated to the person who gestated. However, we argue that gestation-legally denoted as the "natural" source of parenting obligations-is often constructed as mothering, rather than the precursor to it. This means that women and pregnant people are treated as mothers prior to birth in legal and medical contexts. Since legal motherhood is an important status, defining the role an individual plays in a child's life, the conflation of gestation and motherhood does not reflect that, legally, a fetus does not have personhood. This blurring between gestation and motherhood is metaphysically incoherent, as a fetus is not an entity that can be parented. This conflation poses a real harm to pregnant people's autonomy, specifically those who do not intend to parent or who do not identify as women. More broadly, the medico-legal conflation of gestation and mothering is autonomy-limiting for all pregnant people as, resultantly, they may be coerced into obstetric intervention through legal processes. We argue for a better recognition of the differences between gestation and mothering, to promote autonomy and reflect the very different ways families may be formed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Law Review
Medical Law Review MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.80%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Law Review is established as an authoritative source of reference for academics, lawyers, legal and medical practitioners, law students, and anyone interested in healthcare and the law. The journal presents articles of international interest which provide thorough analyses and comment on the wide range of topical issues that are fundamental to this expanding area of law. In addition, commentary sections provide in depth explorations of topical aspects of the field.
期刊最新文献
Towards a rights-based approach for disabled women's access to abortion. Addressing the consequences of the corporatization of reproductive medicine. Guy's and St Thomas'-v-Knight [2021] EWHC 25: Dignity in English law. Donor conception, direct-to-consumer genetic testing, choices, and procedural justice: an argument for reform of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Anticipatory declarations in obstetric care: a relational and spatial examination of patient empowerment, institutional impacts and temporal challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1