Reconfiguring Child and Parental Rights: A Case for Coerced Contraception

Flagrant child abuse and neglect touches community sensibilities and suggests the option of coerced contraception in dealing with irresponsible contraception. This idea is resisted by the notion that the right to reproduce is fundamental. Law and ethics uphold this right, seeing it grounded in privacy and bodily integrity. Gender, race and class issues also argue against the idea of coerced contraception. This essay challenges these traditional positions by constructing a case for coerced contraception from several viewpoints. On balance, the right to reproduce has considerably less legal and moral weight compared to the birthright of the child not to be harmed and to have an open future. Examined critically, coerced contraception does not represent an unusual or excessive burden. Strict scrutiny and due process issues are addressed in allowing coerced contraception to become public policy. Various objections to this thesis are anticipated and answered. These include, but are not limited to, the ideas that personal dignity and the physician patient relationship are endangered and that a slippery slope would lead to greater restrictions on personal freedom. Charles F. Thurber is Clinical Assistant Professor, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Virginia.