Law / LL.M.

This thesis focuses on how well indicators of judicial ideology and institutional constraints predict whether a judge will vote to increase abortion access. I develop a model that evaluates a judge's decision in an abortion case in light of ideological factors measured at the time of a judge's nomination to the bench and legal and institutional constraints at the time a judge decides a case. I analyze abortion cases from all of the U.S. Federal District Courts from 1973-2004. Unlike previous studies, which demonstrate that the president and the home state senators are the best predictors of judicial ideology, I find that the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time of the judge's nomination is the only statistically significant ideological indicator. Also, contrary to conventional wisdom, Supreme Court precedent (a legal constraint) is also a significant predictor of judicial voting behavior in abortion cases.

Traces the inter-related histories of the eugenics movement and birth control, with an emphasis on abortion. Discusses Sarah Weddington's arguments and the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v Wade. Straws the eugenic influences in the case and asserts that these influences caused the decision to be less than decisive.

This study investigates the representation of women's reproductive rights in the feminist blogopshere during 2009/10 United States health care reform. Focusing on two purposively selected feminist blogsites - Feministing and Jezebel- it critically examines the discursive and rhetorical strategies employed by feminist bloggers to contest the erosion of women's reproductive rights as proposed in health care reform legislation. While the reformation of the U.S. health care system was a lengthy process, my analysis is confined to feminist blog posts published in November 2009, December 2009 and March 2010. These three months have been designated as they are roughly representative of three pivotal stages in health care reform: the drafting of the House of Representatives health care reform bill and Stupak Amendment in November 2009, the creation of the Senate health care bill inclusive of the Nelson compromise in December 2009, and the passage of the finalised health care reform bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and supplementary executive order, in March 2010. This study is informed by feminist poststructuralist theory and Foucault's conceptions of discourse and power - an appropriate framework for identifying and analysing the unequal power relations that exist between men and women in patriarchal societies. Foucault conceives of discourse as both socially constituted and constitutive and contends that through the constitution of knowledge, discourses designate acceptable ways of talking, writing, and behaving, while simultaneously restricting and prohibiting alternatives, thereby granting power and authority to specific discourses. However, Foucault also stresses the multi-directionality of power and asserts that though hegemonic discourses are privileged over others, power lays in discursive practice at all social sites; hence the socially and politically transformative power of contesting discourses. Critical discourse analysis is informed by this critical theory of language and regards the use of language as a form of social practice located within its specific historical context. Therefore, it is through engaging in the struggle over meaning and producing different 'truths' through the reappropriation of language that the possibility of social change exists. Employing narrative, linguistic and rhetorical analysis, this study identifies the discursive strategies and tactics utilised by feminist bloggers to combat and contest anti-choice health care legislation. The study further seeks to determine how arguments supportive of women's reproductive rights are framed and how feminist discourses are privileged while patriarchal discourse is contested. Drawing on public sphere theory, I argue that the feminist blogosphere constitutes a counter-public which facili tates the articulation and circulation of marginalised and counter-discourses. I conclude this study by examining the feminist blogopshere's role in promoting political change and transformation through alternative representations of women and their reproductive rights.

Law / LL.M.

The legalising of abortion in many countries has given women the choice or right to decide to terminate pregnancy. The Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act (Act No 92 of 1996) was promulgated in 1997. This legislation promotes reproductive rights including to choose between having an unwanted pregnancy terminated early, safely and legally. The legislation affects both the women who choose to terminate pregnancy and the staff involved in the termination of pregnancy (TOP) procedures. This exploratory, descriptive and contextual qualitative study was designed to gain insight into the experiences of registered nurses in the procedure for termination of pregnancy and to explore recommendations based on these experiences. The researcher adopted a phenomenological approach. Participants were drawn from registered nurses providing TOP services at Soshanguve Community Health Centre near Pretoria. Registered nurses have the right to refuse to participate in TOP, those that do provide the service are exposed to emotional and psychological trauma. / Health Studies / M.A.

The Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act (CTOP Act 92 of 1996) is perhaps the most revolutionary piece of legislation internationally ever to have been promulgated to regulate abortion and as such women’s reproductive lives. Abortion research tends to focus on the experiences of women and thus cast abortion as solely a territory that represents women’s reproductive concerns and the power to choose to procreate. While the CTOP Act safeguards women’s right of choice and a form of determination relating to what happens to their bodies, it also fails to recognise or even make pronouncements about the role that a man plays in the choice to terminate a pregnancy as well as how abortion affects a man’s life. This therefore implies that legally, men do not have a stake to influencing the decision to terminate a pregnancy. This qualitative study was undertaken to explore how young unmarried males whose partners have undergone an abortion construct abortion and the meanings that they attach to the experience of abortion. Interviews were conducted and the data was analysed using discourse analysis. Some of the young men knew about the woman’s decision to have an abortion and others did not know. Common findings include a sense of helplessness due to feeling that the decision is ultimately that of the woman, anger for those who did not know about the decision to abort and a lack of forgiveness towards their partners. / Psychology / M.A. (Clinical Psychology)

This dissertation deals with a theological-ethical evaluation of the Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1996 on the area of abortion on demand. It aims at empowering women and also solving the problem of backstreet abortion. Chapter one gives a brief introduction to the Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1996. Chapter two gives a historical background of abortion and the factors tbat eventually led to the Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1996. Chapter three focuses mainly on the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church on abortion. Issues relating to the value of human life are discussed in this chapter. Is~~es relating to the Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1996 and their theologicalethical in.Jplications are discussed in this chapter, i.e. chapter four. Empowering of women, sex education, instilling good moral values to the youth and also changing the pastoral attitude of churches towards sexuality can help to alleviate the problem of unwanted pregnancy. / Philosophy, Practical & Systematic Theology / M. Th. (Theological Ethics)

The dissertation critically examines and compares the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the High Courts in cases dealing with the right to life, as contained in section 11 of the Constitution of South Africa Act 108 of 1996. The dissertation analysis the issues of adjudication and the concept of justice in perspective. The main question is as follows: Are the Constitutional Court decisions objective, based on the interpretation of the constitutional text, or do they rather reflect the individual judge(s) personal perspective(s) or preference(s). The purpose of this dissertation is to undertake a comparative study and analysis of the Constitutional Court decisions on the right to life, same aspect from different perspective, and show that the right to life is not given proper effect to on account of the subjective approach to its interpretation undertaken by the judges. It examines and scrutinises the Constitutional Court’s adjudication process. It found that the law is indeterminable, because the court’s decisions are not based on the interpretation of the law, but on the individual judges’ background and personal preferences. This is so because the court uses the majority rule principle in its decisions: The perception of the majority of the judges becomes a decision of the court. It is argued that when taking a decision a judge does not apply the law but instead uses the law to justify his predetermined decision on the matter. The conclusion supports the critical legal scholars’ theory relating to the indeterminacy of the law. It tests the objectivity of the judges using their own previous decisions. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LLM

The dissertation critically examines and compares the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the High Courts in cases dealing with the right to life, as contained in section 11 of the Constitution of South Africa Act 108 of 1996. The dissertation analysis the issues of adjudication and the concept of justice in perspective. The main question is as follows: Are the Constitutional Court decisions objective, based on the interpretation of the constitutional text, or do they rather reflect the individual judge(s) personal perspective(s) or preference(s). The purpose of this dissertation is to undertake a comparative study and analysis of the Constitutional Court decisions on the right to life, same aspect from different perspective, and show that the right to life is not given proper effect to on account of the subjective approach to its interpretation undertaken by the judges. It examines and scrutinises the Constitutional Court’s adjudication process. It found that the law is indeterminable, because the court’s decisions are not based on the interpretation of the law, but on the individual judges’ background and personal preferences. This is so because the court uses the majority rule principle in its decisions: The perception of the majority of the judges becomes a decision of the court. It is argued that when taking a decision a judge does not apply the law but instead uses the law to justify his predetermined decision on the matter. The conclusion supports the critical legal scholars’ theory relating to the indeterminacy of the law. It tests the objectivity of the judges using their own previous decisions. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL. M.