In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court held that the constitutionally protected right to privacy includes a woman's right to terminate pregnancy. Following the decision, anti-abortion groups turned to Congress to limit or negate that right. As a result of their efforts, several "human life" statutes and constitutional amendments have been proposed. This Article focuses on the implications of proposed amendments that seek to ban or limit the availability of abortions indirectly by broadening the definition of "person" to include unborn individuals. The Article discusses the potentally serious effects such an amendment would have in areas unrelated to abortion. It finds that the resulting chaos and uncertainty would have great social costs, and concludes that if abortions are to be banned or restricted, a human life amendment that directly deals with abortion is preferable to one that defines "person" to include the unborn.

中文翻译：

---

超越堕胎：人类生活修正案的潜在影响

在罗诉韦德案，最高法院认为，受宪法保护的隐私权包括妇女终止妊娠的权利。做出这一决定后，反堕胎组织转向国会限制或否定这一权利。由于他们的努力，已经提出了几项“人命”法规和宪法修正案。本文侧重于通过扩大“人”的定义以包括未出生的个体来间接禁止或限制堕胎的拟议修正案的影响。文章讨论了这样的修正案在与堕胎无关的领域可能产生的严重影响。它发现由此产生的混乱和不确定性将产生巨大的社会成本，并得出结论，如果要禁止或限制堕胎，