Abstract
This paper considers the importance of temporal categories in medical law argumentation. Proceeding from a view of time as plural, rhetorical, and socially produced, it argues that decision making in areas such as the access of minors to contraception, abortion law, end of life care, and emergency caesarian sections can be usefully read as struggles over appropriate time frames. Judges, legislators, and commentators seek to establish the plausibility of a given legal development with reference to the common sense understanding of time which it embodies. Such understandings may be plausible because of their resonance with the diverse temporalities of the law itself. Alternatively, they may reproduce the temporal frames proper to medical science. Not only is time represented in medical law rhetoric, but deliberation in such cases is also subject to temporal pressures which may significantly affect their outcome. The paper concludes by considering the broader political stakes of intertemporal struggles in medical law.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
