PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Kyle van Oosterum
TI  - My body, still my choice: an objection to Hendricks on abortion
AID  - 10.1136/jme-2022-108538
DP  - 2023 Feb 01
TA  - Journal of Medical Ethics
PG  - 145--145
VI  - 49
IP  - 2
4099  - http://jme.bmj.com/content/49/2/145.short
4100  - http://jme.bmj.com/content/49/2/145.full
SO  - J Med Ethics2023 Feb 01; 49
AB  - In ‘My body, not my choice: against legalised abortion’, Hendricks offers an intriguing argument that suggests the state can coerce pregnant women into continuing to sustain their fetuses. His argument consists partly in countering Boonin’s defence of legalised abortion, followed by an argument from analogy. I argue in this response article that his argument from analogy fails and, correspondingly, it should still be a woman’s legal choice to have an abortion. My key point concerns the burdensomeness of pregnancy which is morally relevant to the question of whether the state can coerce people to use their bodies to help another person.