Footnotes (51)



Roe's Ragged Remnant: Viability

Mark William Osler

University of St. Thomas - School of Law (Minnesota)


Stanford Law & Policy Review, 2013, Forthcoming
U of St. Thomas Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-35

In "Roe's Ragged Fringe," the consequences of one odd choice made in Roe v. Wade are explored. In Roe, the majority chose viability as the threshold at which the state's interest in the fetus became significant enough to allow abortion to be barred. However, it chose a different threshold, birth, as the point at which the unborn child itself gained any rights. This article assails the illogic of choosing two points in time to describe the same essential event. At the very least, personhood rights should attach to the unborn child at viability, as at that point the pregnancy can be terminated without an abortion -- through a live birth. The essential trade-off changes from being between freedom of the mother versus the life of the child, to the cost of the premature birth versus the life of the child; a very different calculus. This article urges that this oddity be corrected, and viability be seen as a crucial threshold not only for the interests of the state, but the interests of the child.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 55

Keywords: constitutional law, Roe v. Wade, abortion, reproductive rights, Right to Life

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: October 30, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Osler, Mark William, Roe's Ragged Remnant: Viability (2012). Stanford Law & Policy Review, 2013, Forthcoming; U of St. Thomas Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-35. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2168881

Contact Information

Mark William Osler (Contact Author)
University of St. Thomas - School of Law (Minnesota) ( email )
MSL 400, 1000 La Salle Avenue
Minneapolis, MN Minnesota 55403-2005
United States
(254) 717-7032 (Phone)

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 825
Downloads: 121
Download Rank: 176,813
Footnotes:  51