•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This paper delves into the concept of “fetal personhood” and dissects how lawmakers systematically deploy rhetorical agency in policy to draw demarcating lines between demographic groups in post-Roe America. After abortion was legalized in 1973, the number of women opting for abortion rose significantly. Even after legalization, however, underrepresented and marginalized women struggled to access safe and high-quality healthcare, and many of them risked self-induced abortions. Since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022, women with financial affluence can still travel to states where abortion is not banned to access their reproductive rights; however, women with low income may not be able to do so. Employing rhetorical textual analysis, I have scrutinized the pivotal legal cases and government acts: Roe v. Wade (1973), Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey (1992), the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (2003), Gonzales v. Carhart (2007), and Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022). By closely examining the rhetoric of these court decisions and policies, I have uncovered the deliberate framing of “fetal personhood” as a key determinant in the ongoing discourse surrounding women’s reproductive rights. Besides interpreting the legal documents, I consulted a diverse range of scholarly articles written between 1970 and 2023. This review substantiates my argument that irrespective of one’s stance on the anti-abortion or pro-choice spectrum, the overarching theme remains constant: the history of women’s reproductive rights in the United States reveals the power of dominant groups and the precarity of the oppressed.

Download

Share

COinS