Gender wars: selfless women in the republic of choice.

Do perceptions of controllability and choice affect the nature and magnitude of discrimination? Many groups of people, who hold seemingly controllable devalued traits, including gay men, the obese and mothers, are discriminated against both in the labor force and in other areas of life. In this dissertation, I show that perceptions of choice and controllability generate discrimination against individuals with seemingly controllable stigmatized traits. I use a hiring experiment in a highly controlled setting to assess this argument. The results provide strong evidence for a causal relationship between perceptions of choice and labor force type discrimination against gay men, obese men and mothers. When the traits were presented as voluntary, gay men, obese men and mothers were penalized when compared to their equally qualified counterparts in terms of hiring, salary recommendations and competence evaluations. To further evaluate the argument that the degree to which motherhood is conceptualized as a choice, affects the penalties associated with making this choice, I analyze the state differences in the wage penalties for motherhood. I use hierarchical linear modeling with data from the 1988-2004 Current Population Survey. The wage analysis shows that net of the usual individual and state level factors that affect wages, mothers are penalized more in states in which motherhood is perceived to be a choice women have. Drawing on moral philosophy literature and the debate around 'luck egalitarianism', the dissertation them discusses the moral acceptability of inequalities that are based on choices. Following this discussion, two main arguments regarding the appropriateness of legal protection from choice-based discrimination are developed. First, in some cases, choice-based discrimination infringes individuals' personhood and human dignity. Second, at times, choice-based discrimination generates inequality based on socially desirable behaviors. The dissertation proceeds to evaluate the differences among seemingly controllable traits, both in terms of their centrality to one's personhood and in terms of their perceived social desirability. The prevailing civil rights laws concerning discrimination based on motherhood, sexual orientation and weight are then reviewed. The dissertation ends with criteria for determining which forms of choice-based discrimination call for legal protection.

In this Article, I describe and examine the severe shortcomings in women's autonomy in the context of reproductive choices in the medical arena. The reproductive choices I explore are those choices that involve gestation: abortion, fertility treatments, and interventions during pregnancy. Due to state and medical interests in the fetus, I describe how information conveyed to patients making reproductive choices is biased towards fetal interests, relies on female stereotypes, and is still conveyed with the objective authority of the medical profession. Moreover, reproductive choices implicate women's values and identity interests that reach beyond medical concerns, which are not part of the informed consent doctrine at all. The narrow, individualistic informed consent torts doctrine intended to protect patient autonomy does not do enough in this context to balance bias nor does it mandate discussion of important identity interests and values. Accordingly, I argue that when faced with reproductive choices, women are not provided the balanced and comprehensive information needed to promote their autonomy. In response to the breakdown in patient autonomy I describe, instead of leaving women alone to make choices or regulating in order to protect them from their choices, a broader framework for supporting reproductive choices should be established. In light of the interdependence of woman and fetus, as well as the broader social context shaping these decisions, I argue that a more contextual, relational perspective of autonomy should be the goal of informed consent in the context of reproductive choices. I suggest a number of reforms that aim to optimize patient autonomy from a relational perspective. I suggest a broad, deliberative doctor-patient consultation and legal reforms that create more balance between the pull towards intervention and fetal protection on the one hand, and non-intervention and protection of women's personal identity interests on the other.

The proposed equal protection fix for abortion law: reflections on citizenship, gender, and the Constitution.

Irish Abortion: Seeking Refuge in a Jurisprudence of Doubt and Delegation

'I Only Want Trust': Norms, Trust and Autonomy

“I only want trust”: norms, trust, and autonomy

(2003). Legal education as a strategy for change in the legal profession. International Journal of the Legal Profession: Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 149-165.

This article considers a program to screen school children for Fragile-X Syndrome as a way to explore several features of the growing practice of genetic testing in American society. These include the common practice of predictive testing in nonclinical settings; the economic, entrepreneurial, and policy interests that are driving the development of genetic screening programs; and the public support for genetic testing even when there are no effective therapeutic interventions. Drawing from research on popular images of genetics, I argue that cultural beliefs and expectations, widely conveyed through popular narratives, are encouraging the search for diagnostic information and enhancing the appeal of genetic explanations for a growing range of conditions.

Gender Equality in International Law and Constitutions: Mediating Universal Norms and Local Differences

Homologizing Pregnancy and Motherhood: A Consideration of Abortion