HomeAbstract of 7th-womensconfParallel Paths, Divergent Outcomes: A Comparative Analysis of Women’s Bodily Autonomy in the Constitutional Frameworks of France and the United States

Parallel Paths, Divergent Outcomes: A Comparative Analysis of Women’s Bodily Autonomy in the Constitutional Frameworks of France and the United States

  • Jul 20, 2025
  • Posted by: admin
  • Category: Abstract of 7th-womensconf
No Comments

Abstract Book of the 7th Global Conference on Women’s Studies

Year: 2025

[PDF]

Parallel Paths, Divergent Outcomes: A Comparative Analysis of Women’s Bodily Autonomy in the Constitutional Frameworks of France and the United States

Kara Marie Schneider

 

ABSTRACT:

This paper offers a comparative constitutional analysis of women’s bodily autonomy in France and the United States. Although both countries claim revolutionary roots grounded in democratic ideals of liberty and equality, their contemporary approaches to reproductive rights sharply diverge. In March 2024, France became the first country to explicitly enshrine women’s right to abortion in its constitution, whereas the United States witnessed the 2022 Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, overturning Roe v. Wade and removing federal protections for abortion. This paper examines five critical dimensions shaping these divergent paths: historical foundations, the role of religion and secularism, structural differences in governance, judicial vs. legislative routes, and societal consensus. It argues that France’s centralized secular governance and strong societal consensus allowed for institutional protections, while the U.S.’s federalist structure and politicized judiciary created a fragmented and vulnerable landscape for reproductive rights. Through an intersectional feminist lens, this study also explores how class, race, religion, and geography mediate access to bodily autonomy in both nations. Ultimately, the paper posits that reproductive rights serve as a barometer for democratic resilience. France’s model provides a framework for safeguarding autonomy against political regression, while the U.S. case warns of the consequences when fundamental rights are subject to ideological capture.

Keywords: Bodily Autonomy, Reproductive Rights, Feminism, Constitutional Law, France, United States, Intersectionality, Secularism, Religious Conservatism, Gender Equality