Abstract
The article, which is based on the narratives of 15 women in the Durban metropolitan area, contests liberal feminist views of abortion resting on the free choice of women. Adopting a radical feminist standpoint, it locates the abortion decision within structural constraints on women’s lives, raising the relationship between socioeconomic freedom and women’s reproductive health choices. The article also contests the popular pro-life/pro-choice dichotomy, interrogates the influence of popular pronatalism and discourses on motherhood on women’s choices, and highlights feminist relational ethical thinking that underscores women’s choices even as they acknowledge principled ethical concerns around the sanctity of life.
Introduction
Human rights, ethical, and social justice considerations, which are at the heart of the abortion debate, are of central concern to social workers. The proposed new global definition of social work (International Association of Schools of Social Work [IASSW]/International Federation of Social Workers [IFSW], 2014) reiterates that the pursuit of social justice and human rights grants social work its legitimacy. In abortion rests the fundamental questions of life and death, the meaning of personhood, and when life begins that elicit moralizing stances, with an apparent inability to bring together opposing pro-life and pro-choice views. This article, which is based on an in-depth study of the narratives of 15 women, contests the liberal feminist view of abortion resting on the free choice of women. Adopting a radical feminist standpoint, it locates the abortion decision within the structural constraints on women’s lives, raising the relationship between socioeconomic freedom and women’s reproductive health choices. The article also contests the popular pro-life/pro-choice dichotomy, interrogates the influence of popular pronatalism and discourses on motherhood on women’s choices, and argues that contextual morality (Tronto, 1993, p. 27), underscored by the feminist relational ethic of care, frames women’s moral reasoning in abortion decision making, even as they acknowledge principled ethical concerns about violating the sanctity of life.
Context of the Study
This research was conducted in the Durban metropolitan area in the province of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), South Africa. KZN has the largest population in South Africa with approximately 11 million from the country’s 50 million people of black, Asian, colored and white descent (South Africa Yearbook, 2010/2011). The Durban metropolitan area, 1 of the 11 municipalities in KZN, has a cosmopolitan population of over 3 million people, with the majority being African black and isiZulu speaking. Since the legalizing of abortion in South Africa, approximately 650,000 legal abortions were performed between 1997 and 2007, with 90,000 in KZN. In 2012, there were 85,302 reported abortions in South Africa (Johnston, 2013).
In 1997, the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act No. 92 of 1996 was promulgated. This Act, which allows South African women access to abortion on demand up to 12 weeks of pregnancy; on the recommendation of a medical practitioner from 13 to 20 weeks; and on the recommendation of two medical practitioners beyond 20 weeks, was welcomed by pro-choice groups but raised strong opposition from pro-life groups. An exceptionally contentious aspect of the Act is that it allows children from 12 years of age to secure an abortion without parental consent. South Africa’s pro-choice abortion law does not reflect the majority views of its population who are largely pro-life (Human Sciences Research Council [HSRC], 2004).
Literature Review
Abortion raises controversial ethical questions, often linked to religious and cultural beliefs, which influence attitudes toward and decisions about abortion (Adamczyk, 2009; Jelen & Wilcox, 2003). The influence of religion is not absolute; individual values and situational factors mediate the influence of religion on moral decision making. As the major world religions view abortion as murder, women who choose abortions might experience guilt, shame, self-hatred, and fear of God (Trybulski, 2005; Vukelić, Kapamadzija, & Kondić, 2010). Religious views are generally informed by the Kantian categorical imperative (CI), based on deontological or duty-based ethics that presume an eminently autonomous, rational being. The distinguishing feature of the CI is that moral worth is judged by the rightness or wrongness of an act itself. The maxim of this imperative is that when one makes a particular choice, one should will that it become the universal law (Beauchamp, 1991). It is based on principles that are universalizable and committed to an abstract impartiality, where particular circumstances, outcomes, and relationships bear no relevance to the ethical decision making (Tronto, 1993). In contrast to this, is contextual morality linked with the feminist relational ethic of care, with attentiveness, responsibility for others, competence, and responsiveness, being its core elements (Tronto, 1993)?
Contextual morality is not only women’s prerogative. The relegation of discourses on care to the private and domestic sphere has disadvantaged women. It is important that the political and public dimensions of care are recognized and that they are appreciated as issues of concern by both women and men. Morality reflects individual principles of right and wrong, which are codified into formal sets of ethical principles. While ethical codes and principles establish what one ought to do in a given situation, in reality these are not always consistent. While one code may condemn, another might valorize the same act. There are often double standards, with explicitly stated public, official systems of ethics and covert, personal morality. Many moral questions are fraught with ambiguity, and doing one’s duty by following the rules, at times, produces more harm than good (Bauman, 1993).
Women’s decision to abort cannot be considered in isolation from their contextual realities. Saul (2003) posited that women’s right to choose does not negate the impact of the moral dimension. Women struggle with numerous competing values and life exigencies as they make the abortion decision. While radical feminism focuses on the structural constraints on women, it does not deny individual agency. As moral agents, women do exercise responsibility and power, and they seek to make decisions in their interests and in the interests of others (Tronto, 1993). When women experience dire financial circumstance and do not have the support of partner, family, and friends, they are more likely to opt for abortion (Williams & Shames, 2004). The severity of domestic violence also was found to have increased the chances of women seeking abortion (Kaye, Mirembe, Bantebya, Johansson, & Ekstrom, 2006). Physical abuse may contribute to coercion into the abortion decision, with coercion taking the forms of pressure, emotional blackmail, threats, and/or violence by persons of influence (Reardon, 2002).
Older women who have completed their childbearing might choose abortion, as they do not want their children to suffer material and emotional deprivation (Finer, Frohwirth, Dauphinee, Singh, & Moore, 2005). Where partners deny paternity, women may choose to abort to protect children from growing up fatherless, among other personal reasons (Finer, et al., 2005; Jones, Frohwirth, & Moore, 2007). Some women who abort compare themselves with the dominant constructs of ideal motherhood and decide that they do not want to be inadequate mothers. Thus, Jones, Frohwirth, and Moore (2007) concluded that abortion could be considered an act of responsibility. There are, however, arguments that abortion for socioeconomic reasons serves the narrow interests of women (Hilton, 2007). The results of this study, which was designed, as described subsequently, to understand the experiences of women who opted for abortion, dispute this argument.
Research Design and Methodology
The study adopted a qualitative, interpretivist paradigm (Cohen & Manion, 1994; Creswell, 2012) and a feminist research design, which is committed to understanding the experiences of women and gendered power relationships and discourses in a predominantly patriarchal society (Mappes & Zembaty, 1997). Fifteen conversational style in-depth interviews of over an hour duration each and follow-up telephone interviews, when necessary, were conducted with the aid of a loosely formulated interview guide. The following key questions framed the study: How do the current contextual realities affect abortion decision making? What role does religious beliefs and cultural values play in the decision? How is right and wrong negotiated within the context of religious and cultural expectations? What support systems/structures are available? What is the potential impact of dominant discourses of motherhood and fatherhood on the abortion decision and on the consequences of abortion? Interviews were arranged per the convenience of the participants at venues chosen by them. Participants were accessed via convenience sampling at an abortion clinic and a public hospital, with entry facilitated by the health professionals. The women had access to these facilities on a nonfee-paying basis.
The interviews were audio recorded with permission from the participants and transcribed verbatim, thus allowing for rich presentation of textual data in the analysis. Critical discourse analysis (CDA), which focuses on social structures and the use of language (Fairclough, 2009) to describe how existing structures impact the lives of women, was used in the analysis and discussion of the data. In Fairclough’s (2009) dialectical–relational approach to CDA, the focus is on the analysis of structures and context in addition to language. While textual analysis is important, it is only a part of the discourse analysis. The emphasis is on how the language action is framed within a broader social order (Fairclough, 2009). Wodak and Meyer (2009) highlight language as an activity and social practice. An oral utterance is embedded in a discourse and regarded as “a manifestation of social action which again is widely determined by social structure” (Wodak & Meyer, 2009, p. 6).
All ethical considerations, with particular emphasis on doing no harm, maintaining confidentiality, beneficence, anonymity in the reporting of data through the use of pseudonyms and ensuring that the women cannot be identified by others in the analysis, obtaining written informed consent, and ensuring that psychosocial support was provided, when necessary, were adhered to. Permission was granted from the management of both service centers and ethical approval was granted from the University of KwaZulu Natal Research Ethics Committee. The data were coded, categorized and built into major themes, and informed by qualitative, interpretivist research and CDA critically engaged with and interpreted. Thus, the thick description of the data, in the voices of the women, and the analysis are presented as an integrated whole, rather than separately. In a nutshell, the demographics showed that 11 of the women were in the 21- to 30-year age-group, 3 were below 20 years of age, and 1 was over 30; 13 were single and 2 were cohabiting. There were nine women of African black descent, three of Indian descent, and three of white descent. The majority identified themselves as Christian, two of the Indians as Hindu, and one as having no religious affiliation. Six of the women were students, six were unemployed, and three were employed. Five of the women had existing children, that is, three had one child each, one had two children, and one had three children. The data were analyzed in relation to the following researcher constructed themes, based on the narratives of the women and on literature: (1) structural constraints on women’s lives, (2) challenges to the pro-life/pro-choice dichotomy, (3) the motherhood mandate and popular pronatalism, and (4) the influence of feminist relational ethics on the abortion decision.
Structural Constraints on Women’s Lives
One of the recurring themes in the narratives of the women was financial hardship combined, in some cases, with abandonment by their partners on learning about their pregnancies. Williams and Shames (2004) found that financial constraints, and women’s concerns about their inability to provide adequately for the child, were major push factors toward abortion. With pregnancy, childbirth, and child care constructed as women’s responsibilities (Doucet, 2000; Sewpaul, 1999), many men in South Africa abandon their partners during pregnancy (Richter & Morrell, 2006). Zanele’s story represents the experiences of other women in this regard: When I found out that I was pregnant I called my boyfriend and told him about it. He didn’t like it. He said that he didn’t want anything to do with it. I said what I am supposed to do. He said that he doesn’t know. We never spoke since the day. He never came to me. Even to today. He does not know I did this. I don’t want to see him no more.
In South Africa, female-headed households are a common feature. Women form the largest (60%) proportion of the unemployed in the country (Trading Economics, 2012). South Africa has an unemployment rate of about 25% (Statistics South Africa, 2012), which is among the highest in the world (Kingdom & Knight, 2004). When discouraged work seekers are included, this percentage expands to 36 (Vavi, 2012). Even those who complete formal schooling are unable to secure employment, as seen in the case of Phindile who stated, “I came to Durban with my son to find employment. Even though I have my matric (a secondary school exit level qualification) I cannot find employment.” Phindile did a further postmatric course in the hope of obtaining a better paying job. Unskilled and semiskilled women generally hold lower paid jobs compared to men, and even though women are employed, they suffer financial hardship. With the increasing cost of living in South Africa and limited work opportunities, women who are dependent only on the Child Support Grant (CSG; which is currently about US$30 per month for children up to 18 years of age) and the working poor women experience extreme difficulty in making ends meet. Five of the nine African black participants, in this study who had children, were in receipt of a CSG which was their primary means of support. A CSG, which is inadequate for a month’s rent on accommodation, will enable purchase of about 15 liters of milk and 12 loaves of bread in South Africa. Under circumstances of dire need, abortion becomes a viable option for many women (Jones et al., 2007; Williams & Shames, 2004). Mphilo, who was dependent on the CSG, said, “I receive Child Support grants.… how am I gonna manage? It’s too hard to bring another child when you do not have enough support for her or for him.”
Unemployment, poverty, child neglect, and child abandonment are often linked. Some of the women in this study reasoned that it was more ethical to abort than continue the pregnancy and abandon the baby, which has become a feature in South Africa. In 2011, there were 2,583 abandoned babies, an increase of 36% from 2010 (Chaykowski, 2012). Abandoned babies are left alone, generally on roadsides, in public toilets, or bushes, primarily on account of unemployment, poverty, abandonment by partners, and/or HIV/AIDS. Women who experienced difficulty in providing for their existing children did not wish to repeat this, and they did not want their children to suffer even more deprivation. It is an irony that amid the dominant discourse of men as providers and protectors, men abandon their partners and children and do not pay for child support (Richter & Morrell, 2006), and that women are left to literally carry the baby. Yet women are the ones, not the men, who are demonized for the pro-abortion choices that they are often forced to make.
The country’s unemployment reflects its racial history and demographics, where the lower income mainly black women are affected, particularly under conditions of capitalist trade liberalization (Bond, 2005; Sewpaul, 2013a; Trading Economics, 2012). Education is stratified as in all developing countries (Buchmann & Hannum, 2001), which makes it difficult for the lower socioeconomic groups to secure decent and gainful employment. Some of the women in this study were struggling against the odds to obtain education, which they rightfully saw as an exit from the cycle of poverty and a means toward a better future. A premature and unplanned pregnancy would have negatively impacted their aspirations. Phindile stated, “I am studying. It will hinder my present plans for making a future for myself and my son.” Contextual moral reasoning framed the decisions of the participants as they considered their future and that of their present/future families. When women are supported to contribute to their care and those of their children, they are able to break the intergenerational cycle of poverty. Enhancing women’s access to education, economic opportunities, health, and creating cultural spaces that respects women and men equally reduces fertility rates, child mortality, and intergenerational poverty and may reduce the abortion rate. Advancing the well-being of people and minimizing gender inequality do contribute to broader social–economic and political development (Klasen, 2002; Sen, 2005). Participants expressed the view that they wanted to have children under conditions that were more conducive to caring for a baby.
Family and partner violence, as a structural constraint, is also a predictor of abortion (Kaye et al., 2006; Whitehead & Fanslow, 2005). The internalized, patriarchal values of society contribute to men treating women as inferior and as property that they have ownership of (Dickerson, 2013). This was evident in the case of Zama: He was emotionally abusive. He used to say ‘you listen—you are a woman, you must know your place. When I am talking you must shut-up.’ If a person is making you feel inferior then how can you share something with a person like that? So that’s one thing that put me off about him—he doesn’t want me to speak my mind. If I don’t like something I can’t say it because he’s gonna tell me he’s the man, I must listen to him so I don’t have to say anything. If he says this or that, it is what he says or nothing at all. Sort of like controlling so I decided to get rid of him. So as soon as I got rid of the baby I got rid of him. So the relationship with him also affected my decision to abort. My dad drinks a lot. He usually says if one of us girls gets pregnant, he’ll kill them or throw them away from home. When I thought of those things I just couldn’t, I just couldn’t keep my baby. And I thought of my mum. She would suffer for my consequences. While I was growing up my father used to hit me and my mum. I just couldn’t, just couldn’t allow that. I was previously married. My husband was having an affair. We separated after our first child. We later reconciled and had our second child. He did the same again and we got divorced. I had to go through so much. I cannot imagine what my children went through. I don’t want to bring a child into this world now not being married and not having that grounding for three children because if he decides that he wants to leave one day and walk out what happens to me and the child?
Challenges to the Pro-life/Pro-choice Dichotomy
Debates around abortion generally center on the pro-life/pro-choice dichotomy. With all the major religions promoting life and valorizing childbirth and children, South Africans generally adopt a pronatalistic view (Sewpaul, 1999). It is this pronatalism and the value of the sanctity of life that underscores the pro-life position (Smith, 2005). The majority of South Africans do not approve of abortion on demand, and a very small minority is in favor of abortion under particular circumstances (HSRC, 2004). There is a presumption that if one is pro-life, one cannot or will not make a pro-abortion decision. The results of this study challenge this view. While it may seem a paradox, all of the women expressed decidedly pro-life views, even as they chose abortion. None of the women spoke of the unborn in objectified pro-choice language of “the fetus.” They talked about the unborn in endearing and humanizing terms like “my baby” or “my child,” and during the course of the interviews, the women cumulatively made 45 references to the unborn as “baby.” Anita talked about bonding with the baby that you don’t even know, you don’t ever see.
The women’s pro-life stances could be seen by them taking on the dominant pro-life discourses about those who opt for abortion being sinners and murderers. Afika said, “I know that I have killed an innocent child,” while Zama claimed “there is no difference between me and a murderer.” Anne adds to the chorus of women’s self-imposed judgments and conscience with, “I think that I am a murderer—that’s what I’m thinking.” The paradox of being pro-life while opting to abort made the abortion decision more difficult as the women had to bear the burden of guilt and responsibility for taking a life.
Some of the women humanized the unborn to the extent that they wanted to fulfill cultural rituals to appease the ancestors and allow the spirit of the unborn to rest in peace. Zama equated the loss of the unborn to that of family members. She said: In our Zulu culture, when you lose a baby, when you lose your mother, when you lose your spouse, you know you need to go for a cleansing ceremony.… whether you are only 3 weeks pregnant or 6 weeks pregnant at the end of the day that was gonna be a human being and a part of your family. So you need to go for a cleansing … it depends on how strong the ancestors are. And it’s worse if it’s from the father’s side. If the father’s side has very strong ancestors then the effect is very … it’s very powerful. In our culture we are not allowed to do this. And when we do this, we believe that it’s a person at the end of the day. It grows up. When it grows up it will come back—need something to buy like clothes for him for her, and a name … maybe after 5 years when she or he’d grow, come back to me on a dream and say ‘my mother I want my name—I don’t know my name, my mother I’m not wearing anything’. Then I’m gonna tell them (my parents) that no one was there and I got to do these things.
The results of this study indicate that while women do make the choice to abort, the choices are, more often than not, constrained ones in response to structural factors such as unemployment and poverty; partner rejection and abandonment; and the fear, stigma, and shame of being pregnant and unmarried. From a radical feminist perspective, having to choose abortion is an indictment on society, and it highlights the relationship between the personal and political dimensions of women’s lives. While women have a right to safe and legal reproductive health choices, including abortion, it is up to society to ensure that societal conditions support women’s choices. Structural oppressions and limitations, which force women into decisions that may go against their moral impulse, must be confronted, challenged, and eliminated. If pronatalism and pro-choice are the preferred options as reflected in popular daily discourse, especially those of religious doctrines, then societal discourse around pregnancy and childbirth within the institution of marriage will have to be challenged and de-constructed so that women, who become pregnant outside of marriage, do not opt for abortion out of fear and shame.
The Motherhood Mandate and Popular Pronatalism
The norms and values of the family, the community, and society influence one’s personal decisions (Ekstrand, Tydén, Darj, & Larsson, 2009). Popular pronatalism contributes to motherhood being revered and rarefied (Sewpaul, 1999) but only within designated circumstances—at the right age, and in an increasingly consumerist society at the right time, and within the context of marriage. Thus, when pregnancy occurs outside of these ideal circumstances, secrecy is maintained (Engelbrecht, 2005). Pronatalism and the motherhood mandate, where every woman is supposed to want to be a mother (Gillespie, 2003; Sewpaul, 1999) irrespective of her life circumstances, contribute to guilt and an internalization of society’s judgments about one’s moral badness when a proabortion choice is made (Engelbrecht, 2005). Yet, at the same time, there is an overwhelming sense of shame on account of the stigma attached to out-of-wedlock pregnancies that push women into the abortion decision. Thus, women are placed in a double bind demonized for becoming pregnant out of wedlock and for making the decision to abort. Shame, guilt, and fear of family and societal reactions often contribute to women not disclosing both the pregnancy and the subsequent abortion.
Social standing in the community affects individual family member’s behavior and choices. Families, concerned about their own reputation, are less accepting of their daughters’ out-of-wedlock pregnancies, as reflected by Nerissa who said, “My family’s name is important to them. A pregnancy and a baby while I am unmarried will let them down.” Vani’s parents coerced her into having an abortion, “My dad was very angry when my mother told him that I was pregnant. He just insisted that I have the abortion.” Abortion was used to protect the status and reputation of the family in the community where issues are gossiped about, preventing women from seeking assistance and support from local structures. Both out-of-wedlock pregnancies and abortion carry stigma and constitute sources of gossip. Gossip stems from and leads to further stigma as was observed by Stembile, “In communities like back home people would start looking at you differently and start giving you different names. Labeling you and stuff like that—so it is not really easy being in a Zulu culture and having a person saying that I had an abortion.”
While Stembile linked her experience to the Zulu culture, such stigma permeates the various racial, ethnic, and language groups in South Africa. Participants were reluctant to disclose the abortion, as they did not want to be judged. Zama maintained, “If I have to go to a support group I will go. But I don’t want to go to where there are people I know—people who are gonna judge me. I’d rather go to people who are strangers where I can be free—not a person that’s gonna tell me 4 or 5 years from that time ‘hey you killed your baby.’” What other people knew and thought about them was important. Zentle said, “you can talk to them now but then in the future one mistake you do they tell you about all the bad things you’ve done.” The dominant societal discourse in South Africa is that children are a blessing but within the context of marriage. Children born out of wedlock are referred to as “illegitimate,” often described by the derogatory term “bastards” (Merriam-Webster Online, 2013). Participants, in this study, did not reveal the pregnancy or abortion to anyone except to the partner where they were still in a relationship, and they did not share their postabortion experiences with anyone. It is inimical that while children are celebrated, there is enormous stigma attached to pregnancy out of wedlock. The dominant discourses on what constitutes the ideal (generally conceptualized as the Western nuclear, two-parent family) needs to be challenged, deconstructed, and reconstructed to allow every child born to be a wanted, loved child.
The Influence of Feminist Relational Ethics on the Abortion Decision
The narratives spoke of the women’s acute awareness of the responsibilities of motherhood and the responsibilities that they had toward children and other significant people in their lives. On the basis of contextual morality, women make decisions informed by an ethic of care and responsibility toward others, including the unborn (Cannold, 1998; Finer et al, 2005; Jones et al., 2007), which was evident with participants. Mphilo stated that, “Being a mother means many things … it is a big step because it is too hard to be a mother especially a single mother because all the responsibility it’s for you, your own. We have to do everything for the children, even if sick, or hungry, for clothes, school. I go and see to the school. It is also financial.” Mphilo was solely dependent on a CSG and could not provide for her children’s needs. Zanele too experienced motherhood as being hard. She said: Sometimes, I enjoy being a mother—not always—because it is hard. I am not working and it is hard to provide for them. It’s good to have children, playing with them, hugging them, seeing them run around. It is not good when they come to you and say “mummy, I’m hungry” and you don’t know what to give them. I know that I am not a good mother because I am not educated, and I do not have a good job. Being a good mother means having a good job, getting a good salary, taking good care of them, when they need something you are there for them. I think that being a mother takes a lot of your time.
Women also did not wish to go through the process of developing a strong emotional bond with the unborn during the pregnancy to give the baby up for adoption. Mphilo stated that with a full-term pregnancy, one would develop an emotional attachment with the baby and that it would be traumatic to give up the child, “You can’t have a baby to give to someone (became emotional). It’s too hard to part with your child—to have the pain. So, so … it’s too hard. So I decided to do the abortion.” Mphilo experienced pain just pondering the thought of having a baby and giving the baby up for adoption.
Women are considered primary childminders, and physical and emotional demands are placed on them even where they hold outside jobs. The historic view of women being the primary house minders (Doucet, 2000) has not changed sufficiently to accommodate women who hold outside jobs. Women therefore, over and above work responsibilities, assume a large portion of domestic responsibility, which remain unrecognized and unpaid, which is a major concern for radical feminists (Enns, 2010). The stress and difficulty of coping with multiple responsibilities contribute to the abortion decision, as expressed by Natalie who was employed, “My baby is 10 months old. I fell pregnant too soon. Both my partner and I decided on the abortion because there was really no option of having the baby. We didn’t want to do it but we both know that we had to.”
Women who are HIV positive may choose not to have another child for fear of HIV transmission to the child, their own demise, and having to leave an orphan, or that they might become too sick during the pregnancy. This was Ruth’s concern, “I hear so many stories if you are positive. Sometimes your baby might be positive. That is why I had the abortion.” Ruth’s main concern was that of her unborn, as she did not want to risk her baby contracting HIV.
Conclusion
Radical feminism has contributed to social work’s understanding of the structural dimensions of women’s lives, and how dominant religious and cultural constructions of motherhood, pregnancy, and marriage have contributed to women’s reproductive health decisions. While participants considered their pro-life, religious and cultural values in making the abortion decision, their immediate life circumstances and needs, and the needs of others around them took precedence. The primary factors contributing to the abortion decision among participants in this study were financial constraints; unemployment; abandonment by partners; and fear and shame in view of familial, religious, and cultural sanctions against pregnancy outside of marriage.
The women held life to be sacrosanct, saw the unborn as babies, and in making the choice for abortion acted contrary to their own moral impulse. As they internalized dominant pro-life discourses, all of them constructed their choices as bad, sinful, and murderous, and in doing so saw themselves as immoral sinners and murderers. Contextual morality rooted in the feminist ethic of care (Tronto, 1993), however, superseded their principled moral reasoning about the wrongfulness of the abortion act. The women allowed concerns about provision for the unborn child, their responsibility toward existing children, and the need to protect their families to take precedence over the pain, suffering, and guilt that the abortion decision brought. The structural conditions that disadvantage women and the dominant societal discourses, that uphold pronatalism but only within certain defined situations, as discussed in this article, reflect an indictment on society. If reproductive health choices, including abortion, have to be freely, safely, and legally available to women, women must be granted the socioeconomic freedom and cultural spaces to exercise such choices.
Stemming the incidence of abortions depends on society’s ability to provide structural and cultural conditions conducive enough to render women’s choices to be truly free. Expanding freedom and choice and reducing poverty mean prioritizing access to education and gainful employment and the introduction of a basic income grant, which social workers have been actively advocating for in South Africa (Sewpaul, 2005; Triegaardt, 2008). Social work educators, researchers, and practitioners have important roles to play in advocating for structural changes and in lobbying for policies that allow women expanded freedom and choice. They must also engage policy makers, students, colleagues, and the community at large, in challenging gender inequality and the taken-for-granted assumptions about gender roles (Sewpaul, 2013b) that place an inordinate responsibility on women for childbearing and child rearing, and in getting men to embrace the ethic of care and responsibilities of fatherhood.
Adopting Freirian–Gramscian strategies (Freire, 1970, 1973; Gramsci, 1971), social workers can engage people in consciousness raising exercises, use popular media to heighten awareness, and they can challenge and mobilize communities to confront the double standards of a society that revere motherhood and children but condemns women for becoming pregnant in less than socially determined ideal circumstances and more importantly challenge societies that ostracize and label children as “unwanted bastards.” The most felicitous start to life, after all, is being born a wanted and loved child.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.