Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.5> Article
Research Article

A Comparative Study on the Rights and Interests of Chinese and American Women Based on the American Abortion Case

Qiqin LuThe Chinese University of Hong Kong* Yuewei XuZhongnan University of Economic and Law Youyi ZhuangEast China University of Politics and Law

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

In 1973, through Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court established for the first time a woman constitutionally protected right to free choice to have an abortion. The decision's derivative interpretation of the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment to due process grounded the right to abortion in the right to privacy, and the right to abortion has had constitutional provenance ever since. The decision was considered a significant victory for female rights protection; however, it remained a controversy for several decades, particularly on moral and religious spectrum. The case was overturned by the US Supreme Court 50 years later, putting a halt to the process of abortion liberalization. It means that each state in the U.S. would decide its own laws and regulations regarding abortion, which set off a worldwide debate on women's rights. This article compares the legal systems of women's rights in China and the United States through the above-mentioned case, and finds that there are many differences in the legislation and implementation of the existing laws in both countries, mainly due to the discrepancy in culture, history, religion, etc. Discussion on effectiveness and limitations of legal solutions to ethical disputes is also mentioned, law can provide a broad framework for solving ethical dilemmas, but unable to deal with every individual perspective or be detailed enough to deal with every possible scenario. In short, the law is only one of the tools in a broader ethical framework that needs to work align with the context of other social determinants.

Keywords: woman rights; abortion right; comparative law
Published: September 14, 2023
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/5/20230323
Volume: CHR Vol.5
pp. 385-391
Download PDF

References

  1. Liu Bohong. (2022) Roe v. Wade Case from the Perspective of Women's Movement. Journal of Shandong Women's University, 6, 1-11.
  2. Zhao Hongjun. (2005) Comparative Study on the Law of Protection of Women's Rights and Interests between China and America: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Globalization and Human Development. Chinese Society of Humanities, 10, 221-229.
  3. Guangming International. (2022) The Reversal of Abortion Rights in the United States Is a reversal of Roy or a reversal of America. Retrieved from https: / /world.gmw.cn/2022-07/04/content_35858467.htm.
  4. Jing Cao. (2015) A Comparative Study on Women's Abortion in China and the United States and the Regulatory Conception on Women's Abortion in China. Law and Society, 6, 10-20.
  5. Manxiu Studio, Wuxi. (2022) New law express women's rights and interests’ protection law "overhaul" - cannot be left and right reproductive rights. 17, 15-18.
  6. E .E .D .C .Dee.No.71. (1970) 2338，C .C.H. E mp1.Prae.Guide.
  7. Dong Huili. (2010) Analysis on Countermeasures of Chinese women's Employment Difficulties -- drawing lessons from American experience of anti-employment discrimination. Journal of Science and Education,4, 2.
  8. Hou Wei. (2006) Employment Discrimination in China: Law and Reality. First edition
  9. Wang, Weizhi. (2022) Is Hart's legal-moral view self-contradictory? Jinling Law Review, 1, 162-180.
  10. Liu, Han. (2022) From Roe to Dobbs: Right to Abortion in Global Perspectives. Journal of Chinese Women's Studies,4, 5-24.