UMass Boston

Shoshanna Ehrlich

Office of Faculty Development
Professional - Hourly
Wheatley Hall Floor 05

Areas of Expertise

Legal regulation of abortion in the US; abortion rights of teens; family law


Juris Doctor, Northeastern University School of Law

Additional Information

Ehrlich, J.S. (2022). Family Law for Paralegals (9th ed.) Wolter Kluwer.

Ehrlich, J.S. and Doan, A.E. (2019) Abortion Regret: The New Attack on Women’s Reproductive Freedom. Praeger.

Ehrlich, J.S. (2014) Regulating Desire: From Virtuous Maiden to the Purity Princess. SUNY Press.

Ehrlich, J.S. (2006) Who Decides? The Abortion Rights of Teens. Greenwood/Prager.

Recent Articles:
Brown, L., Ehrlich, J.S., Guidoitti-Hernández, N.* (forthcoming 2022) “No Refuge(es) Here: Jane Doe and the Contested Right to “Abortion on Demand,” Feminist Legal Studies. *authors are listed alphabetically.

Ehrlich, J.S. (2022) “Too Young for Marriage But Not For Abortion:? Keeping Teens in the “Drivers Seat of Their Lives” Through the Intended Purpose Approach to the Shifting of Age Boundaries,” Harvard Journal Gender and Law, 45(1): 125-176.

Ehrlich, J.S. (2021) “The Body as Borderland:  The Abortion (Non) Rights of Unaccompanied Minors in Federal Immigration Custody,” UCLA Journal of Gender and Law, 28(1):47-89.

In addition, Professor Ehrlich has three recently published op-eds in Ms. Magazine:

and one featured article in Mother Jones:

J. Shoshanna Ehrlich is a scholar-activist whose long-standing interest in the legal regulation of reproduction and sexuality is woven into her teaching, scholarship, and advocacy work. Her 2019 co-authored book, Abortion Regret: The New Attack on Reproductive Freedom, focuses on how the antiabortion movement has deployed the “abortion is bad for women,” trope to argue for increasing restrictions on abortion access. Recent articles address the abortion rights of undocumented teens in federal immigration custody, the comparative decisional rights of teens in the context of abortion and marriage, and the historical inaccuracies/gaps in the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Whole Women’s Organization.