The scientific and political debate over whether a fetus can experience pain highlights a vital and controversial boundary for governance—the boundary of human life. I use the 2012 and 2013 US federal debates over twenty-week abortion bans (also known as fetal pain laws) to investigate how personhood is constructed in a society transformed by biomedical science and technology in the United States. Although those who support and oppose the bill take different stances on abortion regulation, each relies on biomedical knowledge and risk assessment to substantiate claims. Through content analysis of congressional documents, I find that members of Congress strategically draw on biomedical discourse to manage the boundaries of bodies and construct a universal “at-risk” political subject in need of governmental protection. These findings bring scholarly debates about personhood into the era of biomedicalization by emphasizing the latent process of creating a hybridized subjectivity that I call cybernetic personhood.
Beynon-JonesSian M.2015. “Re-visioning Ultrasound through Women’s Account of Pre-abortion Care in England.” Gender and Society29 (5): 694–715.
2.
CasperMonica. 1998. The Making of the Unborn Patient: A Social Anatomy of Fetal Surgery. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
3.
ClarkeAdele E.ShimJanet K.MamoLauraFosketJennifer Ruth. 2003. “Biomedicalization: Technoscientific Transformations of Health, Illness, and U.S. Biomedicine.” American Sociological Review68 (2): 161–94.
4.
ClarkeAdele E.ShimJanet K.MamoLauraFosketJennifer RuthFishmanJennifer R.. 2010. Biomedicalization: Technoscientific Transformations of Health, Illness, and U.S. Biomedicine. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
5.
DubowSara. 2010. Ourselves Unborn: A History of the Fetus in Modern America. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
6.
FloydRobbie DavisDumitJoseph. 1998. Cyborg Babies: From Techno-sex to Techno-tots. New York: Routledge.
7.
FranklinSarah. 2006. “The Cyborg Embryo: Our Path to Transbiology.” Theory, Culture, & Society23 (7): 167–87.
8.
HarawayDonna. 1985. “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century.” In Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, 149–81. New York: Routledge.
9.
HarawayDonna. 1988. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Feminist Studies14 (3): 575–99.
10.
Howes-MischelRebecca. 2016. “‘With This You Can Meet Your Baby’: Foetal Personhood and Audible Heartbeats in Oaxacan Public Health.” Medical Anthropology Quarterly30 (2): 186–202.
11.
HopkinsNickZeedykSuzanneRaittFiona E.. 2005. “Visualising Abortion: Emotion Discourse and Foetal Imagery in a Contemporary Abortion Debate.” Social Science and Medicine61 (2): 393–403.
12.
JasanoffSheila. 2007. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
13.
JonesRachel K.FinerLawrence B.. 2012. “Who Has Second-Trimester Abortions in the United States?” Contraception85 (6): 544–51.
14.
KeaneHelen. 2009. “Foetal Personhood and Representations of the Absent Child in Pregnancy Loss Memorialization.” Feminist Theory10 (2): 153–71.
15.
LayneLinda. 2003. Motherhood Lost: A Feminist Account of Pregnancy and Loss in America. London, UK: Routledge.
16.
LorberJudith. 2000. “Using Gender to Undo Gender: A Feminist Degendering Movement.” Feminist Theory1 (1): 79–95.
17.
MitchellLisa M.2001. Baby’s First Picture: Ultrasound and the Politics of Fetal Subjects. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
18.
MorganLynn M.MichaelsMeredith Wilson. 1999. Foetal Subjects, Feminist Positions. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
ParthasarathyShobita. 2017. Patent Politics: Life Forms, Markets, and the Public Interest in the United States and Europe. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
21.
RappRayna. 1999. Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. New York: Routledge.
22.
Roe v. Wade. 1973. 410 US 113.
23.
RoseNikolas. 2007. Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24.
RysavyMatthew A.LiLeiBellEdward F.DasAbhikHintzSusan R.StollBarbara J.VohrBetty R.CarloWaldemar A.ShankaranSeethaWalshMichele C.TysonJon E.CottenC. MichaelSmithP. BrianMurrayJeffrey C.ColaizyTarah T.BrumbaughJane E.HigginsRosemary D.. 2015. “Between-Hospital Variation in Treatment and Outcomes in Extremely Preterm Infants.” New England Journal of Medicine372 (19): 1801–11.
25.
StevensHallam. 2016. Biotechnology and Society: An Introduction. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
26.
WeitzTracy A.2012. “Producing and Mobilizing Science to Oppose Abortion Rights in the U.S.” Western Humanities Review66 (3): 103–17.
