4 J. Christian Jurisprudence 57 (1984)
The 1973 abortion decisions of the Supreme Court were based on a right of reproductive privacy which the Court in 1965 had discovered in certain elusive "penumbras formed by emanations from the Bill of Rights." This fictional right of privacy was used by the Court to declare unconstitutional virtually all state restrictions on abortion; according to the Court's rulings, the states have no effective power to prohibit abortion at any stage of pregnancy. Even in the third trimester, the state may not prohibit abortion where it is necessary "in appropriate medical judgment for the preservation of the life or health of the mother." Since the Court defined the health of the mother to include "psychological as well as physical wellbeing" and said that "the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors-physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age-relevant to the well-being of the mother," the ruling is a license for elective abortion at every stage of pregnancy up to the time of normal delivery.
One widely overlooked aspect of Roe v. Wade, however, is its implicit sanction of compulsory abortion. Fortunately, in the decade since Roe v. Wade, the courts have not explicitly recognized the legitimacy of compulsory abortion. However, technological developments have recently established the foundation for a compulsory eugenics program.
Charles E. Rice,
Amniocentesis, Coercion, and Privacy,
4 J. Christian Jurisprudence 57 (1984).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/796