Understanding the violation of directive anti-abortion counselling [and cisnormativity]: Obstruction to access or reproductive violence?

Abstract

abstract The Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act stipulates that abortion counselling should be non-directive (and voluntary) and makes it a criminal offence to obstruct access to legal services. Thus, there is scope for directive abortion counselling, referred to in this article as coercive abortion counselling, to be framed as obstruction to access. Alternatively, coercive abortion counselling may be framed as reproductive violence: as an attempt at and manifestation of reproductive control. In this article, I draw on research on abortion counselling experiences which was conducted at three public hospitals in the Eastern Cape province among 30 black (cis) women and four healthcare providers. I briefly describe the coercive anti-abortion counselling practices, which served the function of preventing (future) unintended pregnancy and abortion. I highlight the normative discourses which underpin the practices referred to and describe some of the (cis) women’s experiences of these. I then apply the languages of obstruction to access and reproductive violence, in turn, to understand the coercive anti-abortion counselling practices and experiences thereof. I argue that the language of reproductive violence, framed by an Afro-feminist approach, may be more productive in understanding the reproductive control that directive abortion counselling seeks to achieve and the harm it causes. However, this is contingent on a necessary recognition of the sex and gender diversity of people with the capacity to gestate and the de-centring and de-anchoring of cis women as default and therefore the only legitimate gestational subjects. This will enable a recognition of the various manifestations of reproductive violence, and may enable us to better respond to and prevent these violences.