![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
In US political discourse, anti-abortion framing traditionally focuses on the right to life of the fetus. However, a “pro-life, pro-woman” frame increasingly gained ground among anti-abortion advocates inside and outside of elected office throughout the turn of the 21st century. The pro-woman frame in contemporary anti-abortion discourse situates abortion as inherently harmful for women – both psychologically and physically – and insists that women deserve better than abortion. By introducing regulatory abortion bills that “educate” women about abortion or protect them from potential harm of abortion, anti-abortion lawmakers may claim they are advocates for women. Though social movement scholars document the shift in focus from the fetus to the woman in anti-abortion movement rhetoric, it is equally important to trace this frame transformation among anti-abortion legislators. To uncover the presence of the pro-woman frame, this article analyzes anti-abortion bills introduced in all 50 US states from 2008 to 2017. The findings indicate that the pro-woman frame is found throughout a majority of the bills, which marks a significant use and acceptance of the frame by US state legislators. This frame transformation represents a strategic tactic of anti-abortion legislators to soften political behavior and beliefs that are seen as hostile toward women, especially during a time where there is an unprecedented amount of anti-abortion bills introduced in the states.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1. This quote was in reference to a 2016 bill that would prohibit state funding for abortion, and mandated requirements for physicians. http://floridapolitics.com/archives/209657-keli-stargel-proudly-stands-behind-controversial-abortion-bill-rpof-meeting-tampa
2. See Pew Research Center’s Public Opinion on Abortion Fact Sheet: https://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/
3. Bentele, Sager, and Aykanian (Citation2018) find that close to 300 laws have passed in the states since 2008, and importantly explore the political factors that made this phenomenon possible. Additionally, see the Guttmacher Institute for the years 2011 – 2016. All numbers from other years are from the original database. https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2016/01/last-five-years-account-more-one-quarter-all-abortion-restrictions-enacted-roe
4. According to the Center for Reproductive Rights “State of the States” Report https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/documents/SotS_2018.pdf.
6. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).
7. According to Gallup, public opinion has remained stable on the issue of abortion in the US. See: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx.
8. Reardon authored several books, among them a book entitled Aborted Women: Silent No More (1987), which told stories of women who claim to have suffered negative psychological effects after abortion. (Rose Citation2011, January, 11).
9. Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007).
10. Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992).
11. Some anti-abortion activists claim that they are more “authentically” feminist because the early feminist movement was anti-abortion. Though it should be noted that early feminists were anti-abortion because abortion methods were demonstrably unsafe, unlike today’s methods which have a lower incident rate than childbirth (See Raymond and Grimes (Citation2012)). Likewise, conservative women’s organizations have used pro-woman frames to “disrupt the common fusing of feminist and/or liberal with women’s interests,” (Schreiber Citation2008, 12).
12. Lakoff’s choice to make the “strict father” and “nurturant parent” roles as binary certainly made more sense at the time of his research. However, as scholars have shown, the more progressive-sounding pro-woman frame emerged right around that time and would gain more mainstream acceptance thereafter.
14. The psychological damage element is interesting and seems to be a point of tension within the bills, and perhaps for antiabortion proponents generally. While the psychological harm associated with abortion as purported by anti-abortion advocates and lawmakers is asserted throughout legislation, psychological harm is often omitted from exceptions to regulations.
15. The variables on region, sponsor gender, sponsor party, and status are useful for future analysis.
16. According to an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll conducted Oct. 21-23, 2018, only 4% of respondents listed abortion as a top political issue in their November 2018 midterm vote decision.
17. Two states saw their Democratic majorities split with Republicans. http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/2010-legislature-party-control-switch.aspx
18. This kind of provision often means a transvaginal ultrasound as opposed to an abdominal transducer. Transvaginal ultrasounds are more invasive of a procedure and may not be necessary depending on the practitioner and gestational age of the fetus.
19. Many “free ultrasound” agencies are also Crisis Pregnancy Centers, which are known to be religiously motivated antiabortion organizations, which, as mentioned earlier, are at the heart of the pro-woman abortion frame.
20. The characterization of abortion providers as greedy or intentionally persuading women to obtain abortions is a common theme among many of these bills and something that needs to be explored more deeply in future research. For example, the Michigan law that the above bill would amend included the following statement:
Because abortion services are marketed like many other commercial enterprises, and nearly all abortion providers advertise some free services, including pregnancy tests and counseling, the legislature finds that consumer protection should be extended to women contemplating an abortion decision by delaying any financial transactions until after a 24-hour waiting period.
23. Utah Code 76-7-305.5.
24. See Deng, Xu, and Zeng (Citation2018) for a comprehensive meta-analysis of studies on induced abortion and breast cancer linkages.
25. Claims disputed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (See: https://www.acog.org/Patients/FAQs/Induced-Abortion?IsMobileSet=false%23health).
26. This frame, as used in anti-abortion social movement organizations “posit[s] a connection between the fetus and the woman that undermines the antagonism between the rights of the fetus and the rights of the woman that pervades legal debates on abortion” (Halva-Neubauer and Zeigler Citation2010, 110).