Abortion Rights Research Articles

HOW CULTURE AFFECTS ABORTION LAWS AND ITS IMPACTS

The Supreme Court's role in shaping reproductive rights for women in the United States has been significant since the landmark ruling in Roe v. Wade in 1973. However, the ongoing debate over access to reproductive healthcare and abortion rights persisted, leading to the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022. This research explores the impact of legislative laws on abortion in the United States, focusing on the Dobbs v. Jackson case and its aftermath. This research discusses how trigger bans and gestational bans have resulted in a rapid decline in access to abortion services, particularly for marginalized communities. It also highlights the impact of these laws on young pregnant girls, who already face limited abortion options due to existing restrictions. This research further examines the role of culture in shaping views on abortion, including religious beliefs, stigma, and geographical location. It concludes by discussing the shift from pro-life to pro-choice views among Americans and the need for increased media coverage and advocacy campaigns to challenge stigma and humanize the abortion experience.

A Matter of Opinion? How Unexpected Opinion Authors Influence Support for Supreme Court Decisions

AbstractExamples abound of Supreme Court justices writing opinions because their ideological preferences or identity characteristics run counter to case outcomes, like when devoted Methodist and Nixon appointee Harry Blackmun wrote the opinion codifying abortion rights in Roe v. Wade (1973). These stories suggest that in some controversial cases, the justices ask such incongruent justices to explain decisions because they believe those justices can underscore an opinion’s legal soundness and increase support for it. Does it work? We asked participants in two survey experiments to read about a pro-abortion or pro-death penalty ruling written by justices of differing ideologies and genders, and then we asked them to respond to the ruling. Their responses indicate that deploying identity-incongruent justices can influence responses, but not the way the justices expect. We find that incongruent opinion writers can reduce partisan differences in support for a Court decision but do not broadly increase public.

Beyond bars, coercion and death: Rethinking abortion rights and justice in India

The legal framework governing abortion in India is, at its core, a cis-hetero-patriarchal framework that regulates pregnant persons' bodies using a punitive criminal justice system. The criminal framework encompasses Sections 312-318 IPC, provisions of the POCSO Act, and the PCPNDT Act, which prescribe significant state surveillance and allow for largely unchecked intimidation by law enforcement of both abortion providers and abortion seekers. Several case laws show the “chilling effect” of criminalization on healthcare providers, leading them to hesitate to provide safe abortion services. The stigma around abortions perpetuated by criminalization, leaves pregnant persons with limited reproductive choices – these include either availing of safe abortions and risking prosecution, availing of unsafe abortions and risking adverse health outcomes, or carrying unwanted pregnancies to term and avoiding prenatal and maternal healthcare. Criminalization disproportionately affects marginalized communities, with examples of legal reform showing carceral approaches' disregard for structural factors affecting certain groups' access to fundamental rights and healthcare services. It is, therefore, imperative to decriminalize abortion completely, framing avenues for redressal within a reproductive justice framework. The proposal to completely abolish penal provisions that govern forced abortions begets concerns about leaving marginalized pregnant persons who frequently experience forced abortions with no legal recourse. This feminist dilemma that ensues requires the adoption of decarceral, intersectional approaches that maintain structures of accountability for harm done, without posing any risk to the rights of marginalized pregnant persons.

Domestication of the Maputo Protocol in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Leveraging regional human rights commitments for abortion decriminalization and access.

The Maputo Protocol, adopted over 20 years ago, is a promising regional treaty for advancing gender equity and sexual and reproductive health and rights. This instrument has driven progress in women's health and rights across Africa, with much remaining to achieve to realize its full potential for women and girls, including access to safe abortion. The present paper shares the strategies and lessons from the Democratic Republic of Congo's (DRC) reform centered on the domestication of the Protocol, specifically applying its commitments on abortion decriminalization and access. With a vision of addressing maternal mortality and rectifying the impacts of widespread sexual violence against women during war, abortion as a human right and health imperative was at the heart of the DRC's reform. Governmental commitment, broad coalition building, evidence generation, and an intersectional advocacy agenda were critical to overcoming opposition, stigma, and other challenges. This paper shares key learnings from the DRC's complex yet collaborative reform strategies and its processes. The strategy prioritized domestication of the Protocol for numerous reforms, including paving the path to legal abortion on the broad grounds of rape or incest, and saving women's health and/or life. With a commitment to maximizing quality, access, task sharing, and equity, progressive national comprehensive abortion guidelines were created alongside an implementation roadmap for accountability. The DRC's experience leveraging the Maputo Protocol's obligations to advance abortion rights and access offers valuable insights for consideration globally.

Comparison of Childless and Partnerless Vasectomy Rates Before and After Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.

The Supreme Court ruling Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (June 2022) overturned federal protection of abortion rights, resulting in significant impact on both male and female reproductive rights and health care delivery. We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who underwent vasectomy at a single academic institution between June 2021 and June 2023. Our objective was to compare the rates of childless and partnerless vasectomies 1 year before and after this ruling, as these men may be more susceptible to postprocedural regret. Of total, 631 men (median age = 39 years, range = 20-70) underwent vasectomy consultation. Total vasectomies pre- and post-Dobbs were 304 (48%) versus 327 (52%). Total childless and partnerless vasectomies pre- and post-Dobbs were 44 (42%) versus 61 (58%) and 43 (46%) versus 50 (54%). Vasectomy completion rate was slightly increased post-Dobbs (90% vs. 88%; p = .240). The post-Dobbs cohort had significantly less children (1.8 vs. 2.0; p = .031). Men in the post-Dobbs era were significantly more likely to be commercially insured (72% vs. 64%) and less likely to be uninsured (1% vs. 6%; p = .002). Men who underwent childless vasectomy were significantly more likely to be younger (36.4 vs. 39.8 years; p < .001). There was a significantly greater proportion of Hispanic and Black men in the partnerless cohort compared to the cohort with partners (24% vs. 19% and 9% vs. 2%; p = .002). In conclusion, patients should be counseled on the permanent nature of this procedure, underscoring need for effective and reversible male contraception.

A qualitative exploration of young female Muslims’ perspectives of abortion and belonging following the 2018 Irish Abortion Referendum

IntroductionIn 2018, Ireland conducted a referendum, ultimately supporting the legalisation of abortion. The views of religious minority groups can go unheard ‘by an insensitive majority’ in national cultural debates. This study explores female Muslim Irish university students’ perspectives on abortion and the impact of the 2018 Irish abortion debate on their sense of belonging within Ireland.MethodsTen female Muslim university students completed semi-structured interviews. The interview comprised seven open-ended questions examining perspectives on abortion and a sense of national belonging. A thematic analysis was carried out on the data.ResultsSix major themes emerged: (1) specific circumstances, (2) Islam, (3) family, (4) misuse of new laws, (5) stable sense of national belonging, (6) consequences of historical abortion legislation. Participants were largely supportive of the legal changes. Participants indicated that their sense of national belonging might have been affected if their religious beliefs had conflicted with the referendum outcome.ConclusionsParticipants largely supported the legalisation of abortion in Ireland, provided that the new laws aligned with their Islamic beliefs. The research indicated the referendum did not affect young Muslim women’s sense of belonging in Ireland.Policy ImplicationsMany national debates on social issues focus on winning majority support. This research highlighted the importance of canvasing and reflecting on the perspectives of people from minorities in order to reinforce a sense of larger political belonging.

How TikTok is being used to talk about abortion post-Roe: A content analysis of the most liked abortion TikToks

ObjectivesAccess to information about abortion is essential for ensuring reproductive autonomy, particularly post-Roe. TikTok, a popular video-sharing application, may be a source of information about abortion, yet little is known about the tone and content of such videos. To fill this gap, we analyze the most liked abortion videos on TikTok three months following the U.S. Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Study designWe downloaded the top 200 most liked, publicly available TikTok videos when searching “abortion” on September 26, 2022 and recorded and summarized key video characteristics. We then qualitatively analyzed for content, tone, and common themes. ResultsThe top 200 most liked TikTok videos collectively had approximately 164 million likes, nearly 10 million shares, and 4 million comments. Most videos expressed support for abortion and presented information that was political or personal in nature. Only two videos contained health information about obtaining or completing an abortion, and only five videos featured or were created by a medical provider. ConclusionsFindings reveal the far reach of TikTok, which underscores the importance of analyzing online sources of information about abortion. However, our mixed-methods analysis indicates that the most liked TikToks are a source of abortion news, political opinion, personal stories, and debate rather than a source of health information for abortion seekers. ImplicationsOur analysis finds that the top 200 most liked TikTok videos three months post-Dobbs are primarily political in nature. Relatively few videos provided practical information about accessing abortion care, presenting an opportunity for healthcare providers, public health advocates, and activists to improve access and awareness of new pathways to care. The most popular TikTok videos appear to disseminate news and political information rather than health information about abortion.

Persuadable voters decided the 2022 midterm: Abortion rights and issues-based frameworks for studying election outcomes.

Leading up to the 2022 Congressional midterm elections, all predictions pointed to a Republican wave, given factors such as the incumbent president's low approval rate and a struggling national economy. Accordingly, the underwhelming performance of the Republican Party surprised many, resulting in an election that became known as the "asterisk election" due to its unusual and seemingly unpredictable outcome. This study delves into the specifics of the 2022 midterms, exploring factors that may have influenced the results beyond those traditionally considered by political scientists. Our analysis particularly seeks to understand whether a sudden shift in the public salience of specific issues could have influenced voters' preferences, leading them to consider factors they might not have otherwise. To achieve this, we analyzed data from a nationally representative sample of registered voters surveyed immediately after the midterm elections. Our findings reveal that the issue of abortion played a pivotal role during this election. The prominence of abortion was not predestined, as evidenced by a comparative analysis with data from a survey conducted after the 2020 presidential election. Indeed, it seems that the decision by the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade in June 2022 significantly increased the salience of abortion. This unexpected policy shock had a significant impact on the behavior of voters in the 2022 midterm elections.

Grief after Miscarriage and Abortion: A Pro-Choice Response

After experiencing my own miscarriage, I was told by a pro-life advocate that the miscarriage should be easy for me to “get over” because, as a pro-choice advocate, I didn’t regard embryos or fetuses as persons. While such a comment can be attributed to ignorance, it is true that the pro-choice community in general has been reluctant to acknowledge grief after pregnancy loss, whether through miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion. In this paper, I argue that it is imperative that abortion rights advocates acknowledge the ambivalence and grief that can follow abortions and that they help create feminist, women-centered ways of addressing and alleviating any negative post-abortion feelings.

Contemplating the U.S. Supreme Court's Reversal of Roe v. Wade

The Roe case and Casey case were important moments in the women's liberation movement in the United States, recognizing women's constitutional right to abortion, and a fundamental aspect of their autonomy. In contrast, the recent Dobbs case upended the established Roe precedent, rejecting constitutional recognition of women's right to abortion and reverting "regulation of abortion rights to the people and their elected representatives. To delve deeper into this matter, it's crucial to examine the legal doctrines at play. The Roe decision primarily invoked the Substantive Due Process Clause to protect a woman's privacy and reproductive choices, whereas the Dobbs case highlighted the importance of the democratic process and aligns with originalism in constitutional interpretation. This shift raises questions about the durability of constitutional precedents and the evolving nature of constitutional interpretation. The conflict between these cases underscores the profound implications for women's reproductive rights and the broader women's liberation movement, as the nation grapples with the balance between individual autonomy and democratic decision-making in shaping constitutional rights.

Radical Feminism and Family Law: Addressing Gender Bias, Reforming, and Beyond

This research undertakes a comprehensive exploration of reproductive rights and abortion within the broader context of gender politics, with a keen emphasis on the influence of radical feminism. Reproductive rights, extending beyond mere health and medical concerns, intersect with societal, ethical, religious, and political dimensions. Through this lens, the study investigates global reproductive policies and the international legal stance on abortion. The ascendancy of radical feminism and its critiques against historically entrenched patriarchal structures form a core component of this discourse. The article further delves into the legal histories and controversies surrounding both reproductive and abortion rights, probing into their evolving legal frameworks, international regulations, and the multifaceted debates linked to their acceptability. Through the interplay of these elements, the research ultimately converges on the broader implications these topics have on global human rights, womens socio-economic standings, and the fluid realm of gender dynamics. The overarching goal is to shed light on these intricate relationships, contributing to a more equitable and inclusive understanding of evolving gender politics.

Intellectual Property Challenges in AI-Generated Art

This research undertakes a comprehensive exploration of reproductive rights and abortion within the broader context of gender politics, with a keen emphasis on the influence of radical feminism. Reproductive rights, extending beyond mere health and medical concerns, intersect with societal, ethical, religious, and political dimensions. Through this lens, the study investigates global reproductive policies and the international legal stance on abortion. The ascendancy of radical feminism and its critiques against historically entrenched patriarchal structures form a core component of this discourse. The article further delves into the legal histories and controversies surrounding both reproductive and abortion rights, probing into their evolving legal frameworks, international regulations, and the multifaceted debates linked to their acceptability. Through the interplay of these elements, the research ultimately converges on the broader implications these topics have on global human rights, womens socio-economic standings, and the fluid realm of gender dynamics. The overarching goal is to shed light on these intricate relationships, contributing to a more equitable and inclusive understanding of evolving gender politics.

Denial of Care: Framing the Loss of Abortion Rights Post-Dobbs

ABSTRACT After Dobbs, abortion access advocates try to make clear the harm of abortion criminalization. Two figures came to dominate the landscape: the reproductive martyr and the tragic abortion provider. Their stories focus on the threat to the health and life of women who need abortion for medical reasons. While such stories can produce sympathy for individuals and outrage at abortion bans, they occlude more important accounts of the loss of abortion rights that focus on the gender inequality of bodily violability. Understanding abortion rights as an issue of freedom and equality provides better grounds for understanding their loss.

Psychological traits and public attitudes towards abortion: the role of empathy, locus of control, and need for cognition

In the summer of 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the historic Roe v. Wade ruling, prompting various states to put forth ballot measures regarding state-level abortion rights. While earlier studies have established associations between demographics, such as religious beliefs and political ideologies, and attitudes toward abortion, the current research delves into the role of psychological traits such as empathy, locus of control, and need for cognition. A sample of 294 U.S. adults was obtained via Amazon Mechanical Turk, and participants were asked to provide their attitudes on seven abortion scenarios. They also responded to scales measuring empathy toward the pregnant woman and the unborn, locus of control, and need for cognition. Principal Component Analysis divided abortion attitudes into two categories: traumatic abortions (e.g., pregnancies due to rape) and elective abortions (e.g., the woman does not want the child anymore). After controlling for religious belief and political ideology, the study found psychological factors accounted for substantial variation in abortion attitudes. Notably, empathy toward the pregnant woman correlated positively with abortion support across both categories, while empathy toward the unborn revealed an inverse relationship. An internal locus of control was positively linked to support for both types of abortions. Conversely, external locus of control and need for cognition only positively correlated with attitudes toward elective abortion, showing no association with traumatic abortion attitudes. Collectively, these findings underscore the significant and unique role psychological factors play in shaping public attitudes toward abortion. Implications for research and practice were discussed.

(Re)productive Dissent: Reproductive Justice in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization

The overturn of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in June 2022 solidified the patchwork nature of abortion access in the United States and clarified, for some, the need to move beyond a framework of reproductive rights toward an approach to reproductive justice that would guarantee medical autonomy for individuals in the pursuit of (not) becoming parents. We present the dissent in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization as an attempt to create a legally intelligible reproductive justice. We analyze the excesses of the dissent—the violations of generic and institutional norms concerning, specifically, the inclusion of the lived experiences of pregnant people. We conclude, however, that the capacity for rhetorical invention in the dissent is muted by the uncritical (re)circulation of neoliberal tropes endemic to the Supreme Court and the broader abortion debate in the United States. We conclude with the implications for this (imperfect) articulation of reproductive justice in an institutional context.

Religion as a troublesome resource in Finnish abortion debates

ABSTRACT Abortion is a highly contested issue and one where the fault lines are often drawn along religious lines. In the United States, the most famous and timely example, anti-abortion attitudes and activism are strongly identified with conservative Christian values. But what is the role of religion in abortion debates in a more secularised context? Does religion ‘work’ as a justification for opposing abortion rights in such contexts? We analyse debates in the Finnish parliament regarding two Citizen’s Initiatives concerning abortion. Using discourse analysis and descriptive statistics of speech patterns and voting behaviour, we draw three conclusions from the parliamentary material: (1) religious discourse is rarely used; (2) it is not effective, and its use is considered inappropriate; and (3) voting patterns in abortion cases are better explained by instrumental than religious concerns. Although the Finnish political system is not particularly secularist, the secularisation of political culture means that religion is marginalised as a source for justifying politics. In other words, religion is a troublesome resource for political legitimation in the Finnish context.

C. Хольм, Дж. Льюис. Аборты: аргументы pro et contra = S. Holm, J. Lewis. Abortion: pro et contra/ пер. с англ. А. В. Нехаева

The article provides a critical review of some of the most common arguments actively used in the abortion debate. Based on the notion of moral personhood, the main groups of such arguments (no full moral status, full moral status, and gradualism) are identified and characterized. Separate consideration is given to the right of pregnant women to abortion, the legal defense of the fetus’ right to life, and the practice of using the medical concept of viability in law.

The abortion debate: a catalyst for a review of archaic Nigerian legislation, in line with contemporary global perspectives

The abortion debate: a catalyst for a review of archaic Nigerian legislation, in line with contemporary global perspectives

Constitutional Allies: Abortion Rights, Fugitives from Slavery and the Networks that Support Them

Constitutional Allies: Abortion Rights, Fugitives from Slavery and the Networks that Support Them

A Step Forward for Abortion Rights and a Blow to the Marital Rape Exception

A Step Forward for Abortion Rights and a Blow to the Marital Rape Exception