Swimming Upstream
Sperm Donor Liability after Dobbs
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 17814422 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Blake Hereth (0000-0001-9338-0417, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 344-359 |
| Publication date | 2025-10-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1937-4577 • E-ISSN: 1937-4585 |
| Publisher | University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.3138/ijfab-2024-0026 |
| OpenAlex | W4416746572 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 18 |
In this article, the author argues that the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe and Casey, in conjunction with multiple states’ decisions to ban abortion, reflects an implicit view of moral responsibility for fetal welfare. Utilizing Rivka Weinberg’s Hazmat Theory of parental responsibility, along with Daniel Groll’s principled defense of sperm donation, the author explains why appeals to bodily autonomy do not provide refuge for sperm donors seeking to avoid moral or legal liability for abortions and that the overturning of pro-choice precedents like Roe and Casey enhances the moral and legal responsibilities and liabilities not only of persons with uteruses but also persons with sperm
Autonomy · Legal liability · Liability · Moral responsibility · Sperm · Supreme court · Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare · Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations · Reproductive Health and Technologies
| Highly cited | No |
|---|