
Editorial
Select search scope: search across all journals or within the current journal

Between February 2012 and March 2015, the claim that sex selection abortion was taking place in Britain and that action needed to be taken to stop it dominated debate in Britain about abortion. Situating an analysis in sociological and social psychological approaches to the construction of social problems, particularly those considering “feminised” re-framings of anti-abortion arguments, this paper presents an account of this debate. Based on analysis of media coverage, Parliamentary debate and official documents, we focus on claims about grounds (evidence) made to sustain the case that sex selection abortion is a British social problem and highlight how abortion was problematised in new ways. Perhaps most notable, we argue, was the level of largely unchallenged vilification of abortion doctors and providers, on the grounds that they are both law violators and participants in acts of discrimination and violence against women, especially those of Asian heritage. We draw attention to the role of claims made by feminists in the media and in Parliament about “gendercide” as part of this process and argue that those supportive of access to abortion need to critically assess both this aspect of the events and also consider arguments about the problems of “medical power” in the light of what took place.
China and India, two countries with skewed sex ratios in favor of males, have introduced a wide range of policies over the past few decades to prevent couples from deselecting daughters, including criminalizing sex-selective abortion through legal jurisdiction. This article aims to analyze how such policies are situated within the bio-politics of population control and how some of the outcomes reflect each government’s inadequacy in addressing the social dynamics around abortion decision making and the social, physical, and psychological effects on women’s wellbeing in the face of criminalization of sex-selective abortion. The analysis finds that overall, the criminalization of sex selection has not been successful in these two countries. Further, the broader economic, social, and cultural dynamics which produce bias against females must be a part of the strategy to combat sex selection, rather than a narrow criminalization of abortion which endangers women’s access to safe reproductive health services and their social, physical, and psychological wellbeing.
Despite an increasing number of restrictions on accessing abortion care in the United States, most Americans remain unaware of challenges to obtaining abortion. Theorists of abortion stigma have posited that entertainment media contribute to ongoing lack of knowledge about abortion care. Analyzing all plotlines that aired on American television between 2005 and 2015 in which abortion is considered (n = 89), we examine how access to abortion is portrayed, whether characters are able to surmount barriers, and what documented real-life challenges to access are missing from onscreen representations. We find that 42% show at least one barrier to accessing abortion care, most frequently illegality, cost of the procedure, and social stigma. Almost no barriers—including illegality—are insurmountable, and most are easily overcome for the characters seeking abortion. Some barriers, however, change how abortion is understood by a character such that she opts to continue the pregnancy. This underrepresentation of the difficulty of obtaining abortion care may contribute to public beliefs that abortion restrictions do not pose real challenges for women’s access to abortion.
Obstetric ultrasound is key to opposing ways of valuing foetuses, that is, both to the ascription of foetal personhood and to foetal selection and termination of pregnancy. Whilst ultrasound images are increasingly common within the public sphere there has been relatively little public discussion of its role in identifying actual or potential foetal anomaly and the consequences of this. This paper examines how professionals working with obstetric ultrasound encounter, navigate and make sense of the different uses of this technology. Professionals commonly delineate their work (as providing information) from women’s autonomous choices. Emphasising “women’s choice” can obscure consideration of different collective ways of valuing foetuses with anomalies. It can also deflect consideration of the fundamentally ambiguous information that ultrasound can produce. Distinguishing information from choice is underpinned by a questionable fact–value distinction. We describe alternate professional practices which involve questioning these binaries and foregrounding clinicians’ responsibilities for women’s current and future experience. Public discussion of ultrasound’s different roles in valuing foetuses would be enriched if the discourses and practices shaping professionals’ attempts to facilitate ethical decision-making were included for collective consideration.
On the whole, women in New Zealand have good access to safe and affordable means to terminate unwanted pregnancies. Although seemingly ideal, the current situation is a fragile one. Under current legislation, abortion is criminalised and legal access to it relies on gaining the approval of two certifying consultant physicians. In this report, we provide an historical overview of the social and political influences shaping New Zealand’s current approach to abortion, considering the consequences of having abortion governed by criminal law. The situation in New Zealand is used to support a proposal that a pragmatic liberal feminist approach to abortion is best for women where it is a medical matter rather than a legal or moral one.
In the United States, abortion rates have been falling for several decades while attitudes have remained relatively stable. Given this background, this paper examines the current status of the fluid and contentious US abortion debate. Five relevant questions are examined: (1) What is responsible for the new wave of restrictive laws and what are their effects? (2) What is most likely responsible for changes in abortion rates? (3) What are the effects of the addition of medication abortion into the mix of abortion services? (4) What forces continue to fuel economic, geographic and racial/ethnic disparities in access to abortion services? (5) Why have gay rights been embraced by a majority of the US public and supported in legislation and judicial decisions, while during this same time period abortion rights have stagnated or declined? It is crucial for feminists to continue to promote the cause of abortion and other reproductive rights. Most important, however, is a focus on broader social issues for women (e.g., adequate education, affordable day care) and the underlying causes of unequal power in society.




