This article illustrates how Scottish health professionals involved in contemporary abortion provision construct stratified expectations about women’s reproductive decision-making. Drawing on 42 semi-structured interviews I reveal the contingent discourses through which health professionals constitute the ‘rationality’ of the female subject who requests abortion. Specifically, I illustrate how youth, age, parity and class are mobilised as criteria through which to distinguish ‘types’ of patient whose requests for abortion are deemed particularly understandable or particularly problematic. I conceptualise this process of differentiation as a form of ‘stratified reproduction’ (Colen, 1995; Ginsburg and Rapp, 1995) and argue that it is significant for two reasons. Firstly, it illustrates the operation of dominant discourses concerning abortion and motherhood in 21st-century Britain. Secondly, it extends the forms of critique which feminist scholarship has developed, to date, of the regulation of abortion provision in the UK.
AldersonPWilliamsCFarsidesB (2004) Practitioners’ views about equity within prenatal services. Sociology38(1): 61–80.
2.
AllenI (1985) Counselling Services for Sterilisation, Vasectomy and Termination of Pregnancy. London: Policy Studies Institute.
3.
BellAV (2010) Beyond (financial) accessibility: Inequalities within the medicalisation of infertility. Sociology of Health and Illness32(4): 631–46.
4.
BerrymanJC (1991) Perspectives on later motherhood. In: PhoenixAWoollettALloydE (eds) Motherhood: Meanings, Practices and Ideologies. London: Sage, 103–22.
5.
Beynon-JonesSM (2012) Timing is everything: The demarcation of later abortions in Scotland. Social Studies of Science42(1): 53–74.
6.
BoyleM (1997) Rethinking Abortion: Psychology, Gender, Power and the Law. London: Routledge.
7.
BrehenyMStephensC (2007) Irreconcilable differences: Health professionals’ constructions of adolescence and motherhood. Social Science and Medicine64(1): 112–24.
8.
BrownNMichaelM (2002) From authority to authenticity: The changing governance of biotechnology. Health, Risk and Society4(3): 259–72.
9.
CampbellP (2011) Boundaries and risk: Media framing of assisted reproductive technologies and older mothers. Social Science and Medicine72(2): 265–72.
ColenS (1995) ‘Like a mother to them’: Stratified reproduction and West Indian childcare workers and employers in New York. In: GinsburgFRappR (eds) Conceiving the New World Order: The Global Politics of Reproduction. Berkeley: University of California Press, 78–102.
EttorreE (2000) Reproductive genetics, gender and the body: ‘Please doctor may I have a normal baby?’Sociology34(3): 403–20.
14.
FarrantW (1985) Who’s for amniocentesis? The politics of prenatal screening. In: HomansH (ed.) The Sexual Politics of Reproduction. Aldershot: Gower, 96–122.
15.
FyfeW (1991) Abortion Acts: 1803–1967. In: FranklinSLuryCStaceyJ (eds) Off-Centre: Feminism and Cultural Studies. London: HarperCollins Academic, 160–74.
16.
GinsburgF (1998) Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community, 2nd edn.Berkeley: University of California Press.
17.
GinsburgFDRappR (1995) Introduction. In: GinsburgFDRappR (eds) Conceiving the New World Order: The Global Politics of Reproduction. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1–17.
18.
HadfieldLRudoeNSanderson-MannJ (2007) Motherhood, choice and the British media: A time to reflect. Gender and Education19(2): 255–63.
19.
HarawayD (1991) Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. London: Free Association Books.
20.
HardenAOgdenJ (1999) Young women’s experiences of arranging and having abortions. Sociology of Health and Illness21(4): 426–44.
21.
HawkesG (1995) Responsibility and irresponsibility: Young women and family planning. Sociology29(2): 257–73.
22.
HeyVBradfordS (2006) Re-engineering motherhood? Sure Start in the community. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood7(1): 53–67.
23.
InhornMC (2006) Defining women’s health: A dozen messages from more than 150 ethnographies. Medical Anthropology Quarterly20(3): 345–78.
24.
JacksonE (2000) Abortion, autonomy and prenatal diagnosis. Social and Legal Studies9(4): 467–94.
25.
JacksonE (2001) Regulating Reproduction: Law, Technology and Autonomy. Oxford: Hart.
26.
KidgerJ (2004) Including young mothers: Limitations to New Labour’s strategy for supporting teenage parents. Critical Social Policy24(3): 291–311.
27.
KumarUBaraitserPMortonSMassilH (2004) Decision-making and referral prior to abortion: A qualitative study of women’s experiences. Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care30(1): 51–4.
28.
LattimerM (1998) Dominant ideas versus women’s reality: Hegemonic discourse in British abortion law. In: LeeE (ed.) Abortion Law and Politics Today. London: Macmillan, 59–75.
29.
LawsonARhodeDL (eds) (1993) The Politics of Pregnancy: Adolescent Sexuality and Public Policy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
30.
LeeE (2003) Tensions in the regulation of abortion in Britain. Journal of Law and Society30(4): 532–53.
31.
LeeE (2004) Young women, pregnancy and abortion in Britain: A discussion of law ‘in practice’. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family18(3): 283–304.
32.
LeeEClementsSInghanRStoneN (2004) A Matter of Choice? Explaining National Variation in Teenage Abortion and Motherhood. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
33.
LippmanA (1991) Prenatal genetic testing and screening: Constructing needs and reinforcing inequalities. American Journal of Law and Medicine17(1–2): 15–50.
34.
LukerK (1996) Dubious Conceptions: The Politics of Teenage Pregnancy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35.
LuptonD (2003) Medicine as Culture: Illness, Disease and the Body in Western Societies. London: Sage.
36.
MacintyreS (1976) To have or to have not: Promotion and prevention of childbirth in gynaecological work. In: StaceyM (ed.) The Sociology of the National Health Service, Sociological Review Monograph No. 22. Keele: University of Keele, 176–93.
37.
MacintyreS (1977) Single and Pregnant. London: Croom Helm.
38.
McNeilM (2007) Feminist Cultural Studies of Science and Technology. London: Routledge.
39.
MartinE (1989) The Woman in the Body: A Cultural Analysis of Reproduction. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
40.
PetcheskyRP (1984) Abortion and Woman’s Choice: The State, Sexuality and Reproductive Freedom. London: Longman.
41.
PhoenixA (1991) Mothers under twenty: Outsider and insider views. In: PhoenixAWoollettALloydE (eds) Motherhood: Meanings, Practices and Ideologies. London: Sage, 86–102.
42.
RagonéH (1994) Surrogate Motherhood: Conception in the Heart. Oxford: HarperCollins.
43.
RappR (2000) Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. London: Routledge.
44.
RitchieJLewisJElamG (2003) Designing and selecting samples. In: RitchieJLewisJ (eds) Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. London: Sage, 77–108.
45.
RobothamSLee-JonesLKerridgeT (2005) Late abortion: A research study of women undergoing abortion between 19 and 24 weeks gestation. Reproductive Health Matters13(26): 163–4.
46.
SargentC (2007) When the personal is political: Contested reproductive strategies among West African migrants in France. In: InhornMC (ed.) Reproductive Disruptions: Gender, Technology, and Biopolitics in the New Millenium. Oxford: Berghahn Books, 165–82.
47.
ShakespeareT (1998) Choices and rights: Eugenics, genetics and disability equality. Disability and Society13(5): 665–81.
48.
ShawRLGilesDC (2009) Motherhood on ice? A media framing analysis of older mothers in the UK news. Psychology and Health24(2): 221–36.
49.
SheldonS (1997) Beyond Control: Medical Power and Abortion Law. London: Pluto Press.
50.
SkeggsB (1997) Formations of Class and Gender: Becoming Respectable. London: Sage.
51.
SmartC (1989) Feminism and the Power of Law. London: Routledge.
52.
StathamHSolomouWGreenJ (2006) Late termination of pregnancy: Law, policy and decision-making in four English fetal medicine units. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology113(12): 1402–11.
53.
ThompsonC (2005) Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54.
TylerI (2008) ‘Chav mum chav scum’: Class disgust in contemporary Britain. Feminist Media Studies8(1): 17–34.
55.
WardMC (1995) Early childbearing: What is the problem and who owns it? In: GinsburgFDRappR (eds) Conceiving the New World Order: The Global Politics of Reproduction. Berkeley: University of California Press, 140–58.
56.
WetherellMPotterJ (1992) Mapping the Language of Racism: Discourse and the Legitimation of Exploitation. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
57.
WilliamsCAldersonPFarsidesB (2002a) ‘Drawing the line’ in prenatal screening and testing: Health practitioners’ discussions. Health, Risk and Society4(1): 61–75.
58.
WilliamsCAldersonPFarsidesB (2002b) Is non-directiveness possible within the contested field of antenatal screening and testing?Social Science and Medicine54(3): 339–47.
59.
WilliamsCAldersonPFarsidesB (2002c) Too many choices? Hospital and community staff reflect on the future of prenatal screening. Social Science and Medicine55(5): 743–53.
60.
WilsonHHuntingdonA (2006) Deviant (m)others: The construction of teenage motherhood in contemporary discourse. Journal of Social Policy35(1): 59–76.
