Abortion and Social Responsibility: Depolarizing the Debate (review)

Abstract

Reviewed by: Abortion and Social Responsibility: Depolarizing the Debate Lucinda Peach (bio) Abortion and Social Responsibility: Depolarizing the Debate by Laurie Shrage. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003, 173 pp., $60 hardcover, $19.95 paper. In this monograph, Laurie Shrage makes an argument for a "moderate" position on abortion, with the aspiration that if such a position were adopted, it would have the effect of depolarizing the debate over abortion that has been raging in the United States especially since the U.S. Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973. The consequences—legislative restrictions on public funding for abortion, election of "pro-life" political candidates, and the use of "guerrilla tactics" to turn the tide of public opinion—have had a chilling effect on abortion providers, making it more difficult for certain women, especially those who are poor, of color, and residing in rural areas to obtain abortion services. However, Shrage's own proposal fails to deal adequately with this problem, and she admits that revising the viability timeframe for abortion now as she proposes "will not in itself remove the bureaucratic obstacles that have been erected" (48). In the first chapter, Shrage argues against the viability standard articulated by the Court in the Roe decision, contending that it has been responsible for fueling opposition to abortion that would not have been [End Page 215] provoked by a more narrowly tailored decision. In chapter two, Shrage considers equality as well as privacy-based defenses of abortion rights, and argues that both can converge on a more narrow set of abortion rights than those set forth in Roe v. Wade. She sets forth her own proposal for a more limited set of abortion rights that would allow women a shorter time in which to have complete privacy to choose abortion. An earlier date still "provides an ample amount of time for a woman to have an abortion" while at the same time furthering the state's interest in protecting potential human life (16) and imposing "policies that encouraged women to arrange abortions as early as possible" (31). Her proposal would mandate "a period for abortion on request when the fetus has the fewest human traits, followed by a period permitting statutes banning abortions but containing broad exemptions, followed by a period in the latest stages of pregnancy permitting statutes banning abortions that contain narrow exemptions" (72–73). Chapter three assesses "the politics of visibility"; how pro-life "visualizations" of the fetus have had a powerful influence in shaping public views of the "fetal person," and why pro-choice counterstrategies have generally been unsuccessful. She concludes that pro-life advocates have been more successful in their campaign to restrict abortion rights than pro-choice advocates to promote women's privacy rights to choose in part because the visual imagery they have used in their campaign—ultrasound photos of fetuses bearing human characteristics, images of bloody aborted fetuses next to images of Holocaust victims, has been so effective, and so ineffectively opposed by pro-choice groups. By including a number of photographs of creatively designed images encapsulating her own ideas for promoting her "moderate proposal" (including an array of Barbie doll posters featuring, e.g., "Pregnant Barbie," "Breeder Barbie," and "Ultrasound Barbie"), along with a number of actual ads promoted by both pro-life and pro-choice advocates, Shrage makes an effective visual presentation. The fourth chapter is a brief summary of Shrage's argument and conclusions. Overall, Abortion and Social Responsibility is very well written and thoughtfully presented. Shrage's arguments are well crafted and carefully consider the views of other scholars and commentators on the abortion debates. Indeed, the book is a useful resource of the most significant scholarship on abortion regulation in the United States that has been produced in the decades since Roe was decided. Despite its carefully considered and thought out parameters, the major flaw with Shrage's proposal is simply that a more moderate approach to abortion regulation is unlikely to appease the segment of the American community that has been the most influential in restricting abortion rights. The effective opposition to elective abortions has come from pro-life forces that are opposed to any and...