Table of Contents

Comparative Constitutional Law

Comparative Constitutional Law

Research Handbooks in Comparative Law series

Edited by Tom Ginsburg and Rosalind Dixon

This landmark volume of specially commissioned, original contributions by top international scholars organizes the issues and controversies of the rich and rapidly maturing field of comparative constitutional law.

Chapter 24: Autonomy, Dignity and Abortion

Donald P. Kommers

Subjects: law - academic, comparative law, constitutional and administrative law


Donald P. Kommers* I INTRODUCTION Autonomy and dignity are associated concepts variously invoked to justify a woman’s decision to procure an abortion as well as to support legal measures to protect unborn life. Both values are deeply rooted in constitutional democracies devoted to the protection of individual liberty and the promotion of justice. Indeed, as the rights of speech, privacy and association demonstrate, they are multi-faceted concepts that overlap and collide in the fundamental rights jurisprudence of modern constitutional courts. Especially is this so on abortion. In the following comparative analysis of abortion law in Ireland, Germany and the United States, we shall find that each country has defined these values differently. Depending on how a society – or law – views unborn life, the two values often clash. As the constitutional jurisprudence of the United States, Germany and Ireland show, autonomy and dignity spar with one another when a woman’s ‘right’ to reproductive freedom clashes with the ‘right’ to life of the unborn.1 In this chapter, I examine how three constitutional democracies have sought to balance and define the values of dignity and autonomy in settling or reconciling the competing claims of pro-choice and pro-life interests. Accordingly, the analysis below is mainly descriptive, although its normative implications will merit some attention in the concluding section of this chapter. Why have I chosen to focus on Ireland, Germany and the United States? Economy is one reason. Limiting this chapter to three representative jurisdictions allows for a more careful examination of the factual...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information