Abstract
This article examines law’s representation of embodied female identity in the context of two medical law cases, R. v. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, ex parte Blood andB v. Croydon Health Authority. Through an examination of contemporary critiques of female embodiment, in particular the work of Judith Butler, two discursive strategies are suggested for their potential to reconfigure the sexed subject within legal discourse. Firstly, the act of transgression – the flight from purportedly fixed subject positions – can be read in the case of Bloodand calls into question law’s ability to contain and sustain sexed identity as prediscursive and immutable. Secondly, the exposure of the historical formation of the female subjects of legal discourse, demonstrated through a genealogical reading of B v. Croydon Health Authority, contributes to the feminist theoretical project to destabilise traditional gender categories and enables us to think beyond the category of ‘Woman’.
REFERENCES
Biggs, H., “Madonna Minus Child. Or-Wanted: Dead or Alive! The Right to Have a Dead Partner's Child”, Feminist Legal Studies V/2 (1997), 225-235.
Bridgeman, J., “They Gag Women, Don't They?” in Law and Body Politics: Regulating the Female Body, ed. J. Bridgeman and S. Millns (Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1995), 22-52.
Brook, B., Feminist Perspectives on the Body (London: Longman, 1999).
Burrows, G.M., Commentaries on Insanity (1828), cited in Showalter, E., The Female Malady: Women, Madness and English Culture 1830-1980 (London: Virago Press, 1995), p. 55.
Butler, J., Bodies that Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex” (London: Routledge, 1993).
Butler, J., Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (London: Routledge, 1990).
Chessler, P., Women and Madness (New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 1997, 25th Anniversary Edition).
De Gama, K., “Posthumous Pregnancies: Some Thoughts on 'Life' and Death”, in Feminist Perspectives on Health Care Law, ed. S. Sheldon & M. Thomson (London: Cavendish, 1998), 259-277.
Deech, R., “Infertility and Ethics”, Child and Family Law Quarterly 4/9 (1997), 337-344.
Douglas, G., “Assisted Reproduction and the Welfare of the Child”, Current Legal Problems 46/2 (1993), 53-74.
Duncan, S., “'Disrupting the Surface of Order and Innocence': Towards a Theory of Sexuality and the Law”, Feminist Legal Studies II/1 (1994), 3-28.
Ellmann, M., The Hunger Artists: Starving, Writing and Imprisonment (London: Virago Press, 1993).
Fegan, E. & Fennell, P., “Feminist Perspectives on Mental Health Law”, in Feminist Perspectives in Health Care Law, ed. S. Sheldon & M. Thomson (London: Cavendish, 1998), 73-96.
Foucault, M., Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason (London: Routledge, 1971).
Fovargue, S. & Miola, J., “Policing Pregnancy: Implications of the Attorney General's Reference (No. 3 of 1994)”, Medical Law Review 6/3 (1998), 265-296.
Frosh, S., “Screaming Under the Bridge: Masculinity, Rationality and Psychotherapy”, in Body Talk: The Material and Discursive Regulation of Sexuality, Madness and Reproduction, ed. J. Ussher (London: Routledge, 1997), 70-84.
Gatens, M., Imaginary Bodies: Ethics, Power and Corporeality (London: Routledge, 1996).
Grosz, E., Volatile Bodies: Towards a Corporeal Feminism (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1994).
Hervey, T., “Buy Baby: The European Union and Regulation of Human Reproduction”, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 18/2 (1998), 207-233.
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Code of Practice (London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 1995).
Laing, R.D., The Divided Self: An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness (London: Penguin Books, 1990).
Malson, H., The Thin Woman: Feminism, Post-structuralism and the Social Psychology of Anorexia Nervosa (London: Routledge, 1998).
Millns, S., “Making 'social Judgements That Go Beyond the Purely Medical',” in Law and Body Politics: Regulating the Female Body, ed. J. Bridgeman & S. Millns (Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1995), 79-104.
Morgan, D. & Lee, R., “In the Name of the Father? Ex Parte Blood: Dealing with Novelty and Anomaly”, Modern Law Review 60/6 (1997), 840-856.
O'Donovan, K., “With Sense, Consent or Just a Con? Legal Subjects in the Discourse of Autonomy”, in Sexing the Subject of Law, ed. N. Naffine & R.J. Owens (Sydney: LBC, 1997) 47-64.
Plomer, A., Smith, I. & Martin-Clement, N., “Rationing Policies on Access to In Vitro Fertilisation in the National Health Service, UK”, Reproductive Health Matters 7/14 (1999), 60-70.
Sharpe, A.N., “Transgender Performance and the Discriminating Gaze: A Critique of Regulatory Regimes”, Social and Legal Studies 18/1 (1999), 5-24.
Sheldon, S., “ReConceiving Masculinity: Imagining Men's Reproductive Bodies in Law”, J. Law and Society 26/2 (1999), 129-149.
Shildrick, M., Leaky Bodies and Boundaries: Feminism, Postmodernism and Bioethics (London: Routledge, 1997).
Smart, C., Law, Crime and Sexuality: Essays in Feminism (London: Sage, 1995).
Stefan, S., “Silencing the Different Voice: Competence, Feminist Theory and Law”, U. Miami Law Review 47 (1993), 763-815.
Thomson, M., “Employing the Body: The Reproductive Body and Employment Exclusion”, Social and Legal Studies 5/2 (1996), 243-267.
Thomson, M., Reproducing Narrative: Gender, Reproduction and Law (Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1998).
Treece, S.J. & Savas, D., “More Questions Than Answers: R. v. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Ex Parte Blood”, Medical Law International 3 (1997), 75-81.
Ussher, J., Women's Madness: Misogyny or Mental Illness (Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991).
Warnock, M., A Question of Life: The Warnock Report on Human Fertilisation and Embryology (London: HMSO, 1984), Cmnd. 9314.
Whitford, M., The Irigaray Reader (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991).
Wright, M., “R. v. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Ex Parte Blood”, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law 19/4 (1997), 483-487.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Keywood, K. More than a Woman? Embodiment and Sexual Difference in Medical Law. Feminist Legal Studies 8, 319–342 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009288503511
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009288503511