Roe v. Wade is a landmark case for women and for reproductive rights. By permitting abortion, Roe v. Wade gives women some control over the timing of pregnancy and childrearing, and has reinforced the movement of women into the labor force. Nevertheless, it is a hotly contested decision. The most fervent critics decry its substantive position on fetal status, likening it to Dred Scott and Nazi atrocities. Others classify it as an arbitrary infliction of judicial will unfit to be called law.Roe v. Wade, however, is not as radical a departure from the main currents of constitutional precedent as charged. Its premises about procreative choice stem from the Court's decisions in Griswold v. Connecticut and Eisenstadt v. Baird? Its evaluation of fetal status is not markedly different from common law positions. Nor has Roe v. Wade's recognition of procreative liberty greatly expanded the list of nonprocreative rights, as many persons had hoped or feared.
Women’s Rights, Procreative Liberty and Theory of Identity
