LEADER 05862nam 2200637Ia 450 001 9910783259303321 005 20230607215444.0 010 $a0-8147-2301-2 010 $a1-4175-8813-6 024 7 $a10.18574/9780814723012 035 $a(CKB)1000000000031470 035 $a(EBL)865386 035 $a(OCoLC)782877917 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000253948 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)11227825 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000253948 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10207043 035 $a(PQKB)11492494 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC865386 035 $a(OCoLC)70739006 035 $a(MdBmJHUP)muse10886 035 $a(DE-B1597)548291 035 $a(DE-B1597)9780814723012 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL865386 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10078466 035 $a(EXLCZ)991000000000031470 100 $a20020814d2002 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurnn#---|u||u 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 14$aThe Supreme Court in the intimate lives of Americans$b[electronic resource] $ebirth, sex, marriage, childrearing, and death /$fHoward Ball 210 $aNew York $aLondon $cNew York University Press$dc2002 215 $a1 online resource (278 p.) 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 0 $a0-8147-9863-2 311 0 $a0-8147-9862-4 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references (p. 251-258) and index. 327 $tFront matter --$tContents --$tAcknowledgments --$tIntroduction --$t1. ?Fundamental? Rights versus State Interests --$tI. ?I Am Not Talking Very Much Like a Lawyer? --$tII. The U.S. Supreme Court and ?Fundamental? Rights --$tIII. The Liberty and Rights Protected by the Due Process Clause --$tCase Study: U.S. v Carolene Products, 1938, Footnote 4³? --$tIV. Is There a Protected Liberty Interest for Persons Having Intimate Homosexual Relations? --$tCase Study: Bowers v Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986)?º --$tCase Study: Roy Romer, Governor v Richard Evans, et al., 1996?? --$tV. The Limits of Sexual Privacy --$tVI. Summing Up --$t2. Marriage and Marital Privacy --$tI. ?I Should Like to Suggest a Substantial Change for Your Consideration? --$tII. Heterosexual Marriage --$tCase Study: Skinner v Oklahoma, 1942?¹ --$tIII. Molecular Changes in the Definition and Reality of the Traditional Marital Relationship --$tCase Study: Griswold v Connecticut, 1965?º --$tIV. The Dilemma of Intimate Violence and Congressional Passage of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), 1994 --$tCase Study: Joshua DeShaney, a minor, by his guardian ad litem, et al., v Winnebago County, Wisconsin Department of Social Services, et al., 1988?? --$tCase Study: U.S. v Morrison, 1999?? --$tV. Same-Sex Marriage --$tCase Study: Stan Baker, et al. v State of Vermont, et al., 1999?? --$tVI. Congressional Passage of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), 1996 --$tCase Study: Nina Baehr v Miike, 1996, 1999¹º³ --$tVII. Summing Up --$t3. The ?Rhapsody of the Unitary Family?¹ --$tI. ?Something Smells about This Case? --$tII. Who Is Family? --$tCase Study: Village of Belle Terre v. Bruce Boraas, 1974²³ --$tIII. Family Privacy Rights versus State Interests --$tCase Study: Reynolds v U.S., 1878²? --$tCase Study: Michael H. v Gerald D., 1989 --$tIV. Family Privacy Rights versus Personal Autonomy and Other Constitutional Rights --$tCase Study: Eisenstadt v Baird, 1971 --$tV. Summing Up --$t4. Motherhood or Not, That Is Her Decision --$tI. ?I Will Be God-damned!?³ --$tII. Not Having Children: Abortion as Personal Right --$tCase Study: Roe v Wade, 1972¹¹ --$tIII. After Roe, What Are the Limits of ?State Actions? That Regulate the Abortion Procedure? --$tCase Study: Webster v Reproductive Health Services, 1989 --$tIV. After Roe, What Are a Husband?s Rights? --$tCase Study: Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey, 1992 --$tVI. Back into the Vortex: The ?Partial Birth? Abortion Controversy --$tCase Study: Stenberg v Carhart, 1999 --$tVII. Summing Up --$t5. Raising the Child ?Father Knows Best?? 330 $aChoice Outstanding Academic Title 2003 Personal rights, such as the right to procreate-or not-and the right to die generate endless debate. This book maps out the legal, political, and ethical issues swirling around personal rights. Howard Ball shows how the Supreme Court has grappled with the right to reproduce and to abort, and takes on the issue of auto-euthanasia and assisted suicide, from Karen Ann Quinlan through Kevorkian and just recently to the Florida case of the woman who was paralyzed by a gunshot from her mother and who had the plug pulled on herself. For the last half of the twentieth century, the justices of the Supreme Court have had to wrestle with new and difficult life and death questions for them as well as for doctors and their patients, medical ethicists, sociologists, medical practitioners, clergy, philosophers, law makers, and judges. The Supreme Court in the Intimate Lives of Americans offers a look at these issues as they emerged and examines the manner in which the men and women of the U.S. Supreme Court addressed them. 606 $aHuman reproduction$xLaw and legislation$zUnited States$xHistory 606 $aAbortion$xLaw and legislation$zUnited States$xHistory 606 $aRight to die$xLaw and legislation$zUnited States$xHistory 615 0$aHuman reproduction$xLaw and legislation$xHistory. 615 0$aAbortion$xLaw and legislation$xHistory. 615 0$aRight to die$xLaw and legislation$xHistory. 676 $a344.730419 700 $aBall$b Howard$f1937-$0729283 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910783259303321 996 $aThe Supreme Court in the intimate lives of Americans$93855390 997 $aUNINA