No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Eggs and Abortion: “Women-Protective” Language Used by Opponents in Legislative Debates over Reproductive Health
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2021
Extract
The language of “protection” has been a dominate frame in the political discourse of the contemporary women’s movement, especially as it relates to reproductive health. Since the 1960s, and coming of age in the Women’s Health Movement, activists and advocates have fought for the protection of women’s rights and health, and against gender-based discrimination and restrictions to reproductive health services, such as abortion and contraception. In the case of women’s reproductive rights, the use of the “protective” frame has been a resonant and effective mobilizing discourse for quite a while. This paper investigates the use of this frame, by ideological opponents, during a recent California legislative session.
- Type
- Symposium
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2015
References
Rosen, R., The World Split Open: How the Modern Women's Movement Changed America (New York: Penguin Books, 2001).Google Scholar
Jenson, J., “Changing Discourse, Changing Agendas: Political Rights and Reproductive Policies in France,” Fainsod Katzenstein, M. McClurg Mueller, C., eds., in The Women's Movements of the United States and Western Europe: Consciousness, Political Opportunities, and Public Policy (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987): At Chap. 3, 64–88.Google Scholar
Benford, R. D. Snow, D. A., “Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment,” Annual Review of Sociology 26 (2000): 611–639; Hall, S., “The Rediscovery of Ideology: Return to the Repressed in Media Studies,” in Gurevitch, M. Bennett, T. Curon, J. Woolcott, J., eds., Culture, Society and the Media (New York: Methuen, 1982): At 56–90.Google Scholar
Siegel, R., “Constitutional Culture, Social Movement Conflict and Constitutional Change: The Case of the De Facto ERA,” California Law Review 1323, no. 94 (2006): 1350–1366.Google Scholar
See Benford, Snow, , supra note 3; see Hall, , supra note 3; Jasper, J. M., The Art of Moral Protest: Culture, Biography, and Creativity in Social Movements (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997).Google Scholar
Greenhouse, L. Siegel, R. B., eds. Before Roe v. Wade: Voices That Shaped the Abortion Debate before the Supreme Court's Ruling (New York, NY: Kaplan Publishing, 2010); Garrow, D. J., Liberty and Sexuality: The Right to Privacy and the Making of Roe v. Wade (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 8).Google Scholar
Joffe, C., Doctors of Conscience: The Struggle to Provide Abortion before and after Roe V. Wade (Boston: Beacon Press, 1995).Google Scholar
Condit, C. M., Decoding Abortion Rhetoric: Communicating Social Change (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1990).Google Scholar
Abrams, P. L., “The Scarlet Letter: The Supreme Court and the Language of Abortion Stigma,” Michigan Journal of Gender & Law 19, no. 293 (2013): 293–337.Google Scholar
Gallup Poll News Service, “Abortion,” Gallup World Headquarters, available at <http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/Abortion.aspx> (last visited April 10, 2015).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Weitz, T. A., “Producing and Mobilizing Science to Oppose Abortion Rights in the United States,” Western Humanities Review LXVI, no. 3 (Fall 2012): 103–117.Google Scholar
Siegel, R. B., “The Right's Reasons: Constitutional Conflict and the Spread of Woman-Protective Antiabortion Argument,” Duke Law Journal 57 (2008): 1641–1692.Google Scholar
Gonzales v. Carhart, 413F. Supreme Court no 05–380. 127 S.CT. 1610 2007.Google Scholar
Manian, M., “The Irrational Woman: Informed Consent and Abortion Decision-Making,” Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy 16, no. 223 (2009): 223–292.Google Scholar
Kelly, K., “The Spread of ‘Post Abortion Syndrome’ as Social Diagnosis,” Social Science & Medicine 102 (2014): 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weitz, T. A. Taylor, D. Desai, S. Upadhyay, U. D. Waldman, J. Battistelli, M. F. Drey, E. A., “Safety of Aspiration Abortion Performed by Nurse Practitioners, Certified Nurse Midwives, and Physician Assistants under a California Legal Waiver,” American Journal of Public Health 103, no. 3 (2013): 454–461; Bartlett, L. A. Berg, C. J. Shulman, H. B. Zane, S. B. Green, C. A. Whitehead, S. Atrash, H. K., “Risk Factors for Legal Induced Abortion-Related Mortality in the United States,” Obstetrics and Gynecology 103, no.4 (Apr 2004): 729–737.Google Scholar
Jones, B. S. Weitz, T. A., “Legal Barriers to Second-Trimester Abortion Provision and Public Health Consequences,” American Journal of Public Health 99, no. 4 (April 2009): 623–630; Jones, C., “With Abortion Clinics Closing, ‘People Are Really Desperate Now’ as Clinics Turn Women Away, Volunteer Abortion Funds Are Scrambling to Help Their Clients,” Texas Observer, November 5, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petchesky, R. P., Abortion and Women's Choice: The State, Sexuality, and Reproductive Freedom (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
Robertson, J. A., Children of Choice: Freedom and the New Reproductive Technologies (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
Thompson, C., Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2005); Rodin, J. Collins, Aila, eds., Women and New Reproductive Technologies: Medical, Psychosocial, Legal, and Ethical Dilemmas (Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum, 1991); Spar, D. L., The Baby Business: How Money, Science, and Politics Drive the Commerce of Conception (Cambridge: Harvard Business Press, 2013).Google Scholar
Ginsburg, F. Rapp, R., eds., Conceiving the New World Order (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995); Roberts, D., Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty (New York: Pantheon Books, 1997); Solinger, R., Pregnancy and Power: A Short History of Reproductive Politics in America (New York: New York University Press, 2005); Collins, P. H., Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment (New York: Routledge, 1990); Goodwin, M., “Assisted Reproductive Technology and the Double-Bind: The Illusory Choice of Motherhood,” Journal of Gender, Race and Justice 9, no.1 (2005): 1–54.Google Scholar
Rothman, B. K., Recreating Motherhood: Ideology and Technology in a Patriarchal Society (New York: Norton, 1989); Rothman, B. K., “Ideology and Technology: The Social Context of Procreative Technology,” Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine 65, no.3 (May 1998): 201–209; Corea, G. Klein, R. Hanmer, J. Holmes, B. Hoskins, B. Kishwar, M. Raymond, J. Rowland, R. Steinbacher, R., Man-Made Women: How New Reproductive Technologies Affect Women (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987); Ardittie, R. Klein, R. Minden, S., Test Tube Women: What Future for Motherhood? (London: Pandora Press, Routledge, Kegan and Paul Ltd. 1984): At 189; Engineering, Feminist International Network of Resistence to Reproduction and Genetic. “Resolution of the First European Conference of Finrrage (Sweden),” available at <http://www.finrrage.org/pdf_files/Conference%20Reports/Finrrage_European_Conf_Reso.pdf> (last visited April 10, 2015).Google Scholar
Bailey, A., “Reconceiving Surrogacy: Toward a Reproductive Justice Account of Indian Surrogacy,” Hypatia-a Journal of Feminist Philosophy 26, no. 4 (Fal 2011): 715–741; Daniels, C. R. Heidt-Forsythe, E., “Gendered Eugenics and the Problematic of Free Market Reproductive Technologies: Sperm and Egg Donation in the United States,” Signs 37, no.3 (Spring 2012): 719–747; Roberts, D., “Race, Gender, and Genetic Technologies: A New Reproductive Dystopia,” Signs 34, no.4 (2009): 783–804; Roberts, D., “Privatization and Punishment in the New Age of Reprogenetics,” Emory Law Journal 54, no.1343 (2005): 1343–1360; Mamo, L., Queering Reproduction: Achieving Pregnancy in the Age of Technoscience (Durham: Duke University Press, 2007); Almeling, R., Sex Cells: The Medical Market for Eggs and Sperm (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011); Goodwin, M., ed., Baby Markets: Money and the New Politics of Creating Families (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010).Google Scholar
Raymond, J. G., Women as Wombs: Reproductive Technologies and the Battle over Women's Freedom (San Francisco: Harper, 1993); Coeytaux, F. Darnovsky, M. Berke Fogel, S., “Assisted Reproduction and Choice in the Biotech Age: Recommendations for a Way Forward (Editorial),” Contraception 83, no.1 (2011): 1–4; George, K., “Women as Collateral Damage: A Critique of Egg Harvesting for Cloning Research,” Women's Studies International Forum 31, no.4 (2008): 285–292.Google Scholar
Darnovsky, M., “The Baby Business: A Fairy Tale?” in Biopolitical Times (Berkeley, California: Center for Genetics and Society, 2011).Google Scholar
See Spar, , supra note 21; Goodwin, supra note 22; Mundy, L., Everything Conceivable: How Assisted Reproduction Is Changing Our World (New York: Random House, 2008); Kalbian, A., “Considering the Risks to Economically Disadvantaged Egg Donors,” American Jornal of Bioethics 11, no. 9 (2011): 44–45.Google Scholar
Beeson, D., “Dangerous Harvest,” GeneWatch 23, no. 5 (2010) available at <http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/GeneWatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=312&archive=yes>; Beeson, D. Lippman, A., “Egg Harvesting for Stem Cell Research: Medical Risks and Ethical Problems,” Reproductive BioMedicine Online 13, no. 4 (2006): 573–579; Sauer, M. V., “Should Egg Donors Be Paid? Exploitation or a Woman's Right?” BMJ 314, no. 7091 (May 10 1997): 1400–1403; Sauer, M. V., “Egg Donor Solicitation: Problems Exist, but Do Abuses?” American Journal of Bioethics 1, no. 4 (Fall 2001): 1–2; Norsigian, J, “Egg Donation for Ivf and Stem Cell Research: Time to Weigh the Risks to Women's Health,” in Different Takes, edited by A Publication of the Population and Development Program at Hampshire College (Hampshire College, 2005).Google Scholar
Fillmore, C., “Frame Semantics,” in Linguistics in the Morning Calm (Seoul, Hanshin Publishing Co., 1982): At 111–137; Tannen, D., “What's in a Frame? Surface Evidence for Underlying Expectations,” in Freedle, R., ed., New Directions in Discourse Processing (Norwood: Ablex, 1979): 137–181; Petruck, M., “Frame Semantics,” in Östman, J.-O. Verschueren, J. Blommaert, J., eds., Handbook of Pragmatics (Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1996).Google Scholar
Id. (Petruck).Google Scholar
“Staff on the Internet: California Considers Expanding Non-Physician Abortion,” available at <http://lldf.org//california-considers-expanding-non-physician-abortion/> (last visited April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
Ertelt, S. Sullenger, C., “California Governor Gets Bill to Allow Nurses to Do Vacuum Abortions,” available at <http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/12/california-governor-gets-bill-to-allow-nurses-to-do-vacuum-abortions/> (last visited April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
Kral, J., “California AB154, and the Culture of Death,” available at <http://www.truthandcharityforum.org/california-ab-154-and-the-culture-of-death/> (last visited April 10, 2015).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Schneider, J., “Testimony by Jennifer Schneider, MD to the California Senate Health Committee re AB 926,” available at <http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=6950> (last visited April 10, 2015).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Coeytaux, F. Tober, D., “Eggs for Cash: Pitting Choice against Risk,” available at <http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/09/04/eggs-for-cash-pitting-choice-against-risk/> (last visited April 10, 2015).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Darnovsky, M. Berke Fogel, S., “California Controversy: Let's Not Expand the Market in Women's Eggs,” available at <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcy-darnovsky-phd/california-controversy-le_b_3861808.html> (last visited April 10, 2015). (last visited April 10, 2015).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Darnovsky,+M.+Berke+Fogel,+S.,+“California+Controversy:+Let's+Not+Expand+the+Market+in+Women's+Eggs,”+available+at++(last+visited+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
See Darnovsky, , supra note 26 (emphasis added).Google Scholar
Tober, D. Scheper-Hughes, N., “Viewpoints: Risks are Many in Paying Women to Donate Eggs,” available at <http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=7023> (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
Ertelt, S., “California Senate Approves Bill Allowing Nurses to Do Abortions,” available at <http://www.lifenews.com/2013/08/27/california-senate-approves-bill-allowing-nurses-to-do-abortions/> (last visited April 10, 2015).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Danielle, , “AB 154: Abortion Expansion, Capitol Resource Institute,” available at <http://capitolresource.org/capitol-update-67/> (last viewed April 10, 2015).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Ruiz-Durant, M. Wong, V., “Testimony in Opposition to AB154 – Abortion,” available at <http://www.cacatholic.org/index.php/issues2/reverence-for-life/respect-life/652-testimony-in-opposition-to-ab-154-atkins-d-san-diego-abortion> (last visited April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
“Contact Governor Brown Today and Urge Him to: Veto AB926,” available at <http://humanebiotech.org/contactgovernorbrown.html> (last viewed April 10, 2015).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
See Tober, , supra note 38 (emphasis added).Google Scholar
“AB154 Coalition Opposition Statement,” available at <http://www.cherishca.org/newsroom/ab-154-coalition-opposition-statement/> (last viewed April 10, 2015).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Brown, M., “Taking Baby-Killing to a New Low,” available at <http://www.christianpost.com/news/taking-baby-killing-to-a-new-low-104637/> (last viewed April 10, 2015).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Cody, D., “California Considers Expanding Non-Physician Abortion,” available at <http://www.lldf.org/california-considers-expanding-non-physician-abortion/> (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
“Issues: Stem Cell Research: Women's Eggs for Research,” available at <http://www.prochoicealliance.org/womens-eggs-for-research> (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added). (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=“Issues:+Stem+Cell+Research:+Women's+Eggs+for+Research,”+available+at++(last+viewed+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
“Coalition Urges Veto of AB926-Human Egg Harvesting Threatens Women's Health,” <http://2013/06/coalition-urges-veto-of-ab-926-human-egg-harvesting-threatens-womens-health/> (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added). (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=“Coalition+Urges+Veto+of+AB926-Human+Egg+Harvesting+Threatens+Women's+Health,”++(last+viewed+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
Brown, E. G., “Veto Message on AB 926,” edited by Office of the Governor, Sacramento, 2013 (emphasis added).Google Scholar
Coeytaux, F. Tober, D., “Eggs for Cash: Pitting Choice against Risk,” available at <http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/09/04/eggs-for-cash-pitting-choice-against-risk/> (last visited April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
Danovsky, M. Coeytaux, F. Beeson, D. Stevens, T. Norsigian, J. Ikemoto, L. Gruber, J. Annas, G. Pearson, C. Cool, R. Falter, S. Newman, A. Schneider, J. Parisian, S., “Co-Signed Letter to Assemblywoman Bonillla opposing AB926,” available at <http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/downloads/Bonilla_CGS_4_5_13.pdf> (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
“Concerned Women for California, AB154 Abortion Accessibility,” available at <http://www.cwfa.org/images/content/caaa081313.pdf> (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
Hogan, C. Ruiz-Durant, M. Wong, V., “Testimony in Opposition to AB154 – Abortion,” available at <http://www.cacatholic.org/index.php/issues2/reverence-for-life/respect-life/652-testimony-in-opposition-to-ab-154-atkins-d-san-diego-abortion> (last visited January 16, 2014).+(last+visited+January+16,+2014).>Google Scholar
Erelt, S., “California Governor Gets Bill to Allow Nurses to Do Vacuum Abortions,” available at <http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/12/california-governor-gets-bill-to-allow-nurses-to-do-vacuum-abortions/> (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
Kral, J., “California AB154, and the Culture of Death,” available at <http://www.truthandcharityforum.org/california-ab-154-and-the-culture-of-death/> (last viewed April 10, 2015) (emphasis added).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015)+(emphasis+added).>Google Scholar
See supra note 45 (emphasis added).Google Scholar
See supra note 45.Google Scholar
See Danielle, , supra note 40.Google Scholar
See supra note 45 (emphasis added).Google Scholar
Tober, D., “Testimony by Diane Tober, PhD to the California Senate Health Committee,” available at <http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=6949> (last viewed April 10, 2015).+(last+viewed+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Rosen, R., The World Split Open: How the Modern Women's Movement Changed America (New York: Penguin Books, 2001).Google Scholar
Boston Women's Health Book Collective, Our Bodies, Ourselves: A Book by and for Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1971).Google Scholar
Joffe, C. E. Weitz, T. A. Stacey, C. L. “Uneasy Allies: Pro-Choice Physicians, Feminist Health Activists and the Struggle for Abortion Rights,” Sociology of Health & Illness 26, no. 6 (2004): 775–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See Siegel, , supra note 13.Google Scholar
Madeira, J. L., “Woman Scorned?: Resurrecting Infertile Women's Decision-Making Autonomy,” Maryland Law Review 71, no. 2 (2012): 339–410.Google Scholar