| In this thesis the author analyses legal challenges brought before courts in Chile and Argentina in which the challengers allege that emergency contraception is abortive and therefore a violation of the constitutional right to life of the unborn.;Most importantly, the author demonstrates that these courts have violated women's constitutional rights by ignoring women's rights, concerns and needs, thereby frustrating women's attempts to achieve equality. The author concludes with guidance for judges regarding appropriate reasoning in these cases.;Demonstrating that these courts have focused on a determination of when life begins, as opposed to when life should be legally protected, the author argues that they have based their rulings on Catholic doctrine rather than on scientific evidence. She contrasts these approaches with those taken in similar cases by courts in the United Kingdom, Spain and in international human rights decisions. The author argues that by enforcing religious norms, these courts are jeopardizing the principle of secularity that is fundamental to democracy. |
