Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:42:59.704Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

False Framings: The Co-Opting of Sex-Selection by the Anti-Abortion Movement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Seema Mohapatra
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Sujatha Jesudason and Tracy Weitz provide an empirical examination of the framing of public discourses related to assisted reproductive technology (ART) and abortion by examining two bills considered by the California legislature in “Eggs and Abortion: The Language of Protection in Legislation Regulating Abortion and Egg Donation in Debate over Two California Laws.” Jesudason and Weitz analyze the framing of two different legislative efforts: one allowing non-physician practitioners to perform non-surgical abortions and the other removing the prohibition on egg donor payment in the research setting. Jesudason and Weitz identified three different memes that were present in the discussion of these two bills: health care providers and scientists as inherently suspect, denial of women of agency through speaking about them as passive actors that things happen to, and the focus on potential harms and the need to protect women from harm. What was most compelling about their article is that they convincingly show how these themes were used as political tools by both anti-choice and pro-choice groups in California. Jesudason and Weitz note that “frames and language matter.”

Type
Symposium
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , Summer 2015 , pp. 270 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Jesudason, S. Weitz, T., “Eggs and Abortion: The Language of Protection in Legislation Regulating Abortion and Egg Donation in Debate over Two California Laws,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 43, no. 2 (2015): 259–269.Google Scholar
In this commentary, I am using the term “woman-protective” to mean actually saving female fetuses from being destroyed, as this is how it has been raised in the sex-selective abortion context. The term has been used with a different meaning in another context by Reva Siegal. Seigal refers to woman-protective language as language that paternalistically suggests that women need to be protected from their poorly reasoned abortion decisions (which she convincingly argues violates the equal protection clause). See Siegel, R., “The New Politics of Abortion: An Equality Analysis of Woman-Protective Abortion Restrictions,” University of Illinois Law Review 2007, no. 3 (2007): 991–1053, at 994.Google Scholar
Kalandry, S., “Sex Selection in the United States and India: A Contextualist Feminist Approach,” UCLA Journal of International Law & Foreign Affairs 18, no. 1 (2013): 61–85, at 81.Google Scholar
Mohapatra, S., “Global Legal Responses to Prenatal Gender Identification and Sex Selection,” Nevada Law Journal 13, no. 3 (2013): 690–721Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Redden, M., “A New Study Demolishes the Racist Myths Behind Sex-Selective Abortion Bans Surprise! The ‘Pro-Women’ Bans Are Just Another Way to Block Abortion Rights,” Mother Jones, June 4, 2014, available at <m.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/study-sex-selective-abortion-bans-racist-asian-americans> (last visited April 10, 2015).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Unfortunately, sex-selective abortion is a real issue in some countries, such as India. India's government has responded to such actions with the Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act (now known as the PreConception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act) (“PNDTA”.) This Act prevents the use of ultrasound or other prenatal techniques to reveal a baby's gender prior to birth. Although it has been in effect for many years, enforcement has been lax. I have argued elsewhere that curbing son-preference by educating girls and enforcing dowry bans may be more effective than PNDTA's bans on gender identification. See Mohapatra, , supra note 4, at 715.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
The research for the report consisted of (1) conducting desk research; (2) analyzing quantitative data from the American Community Survey (ACS) from 2007 to 2011 and the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) from 1979 to 1993; and (3) conducting in-country interviews of physicians, lawyers, government officials, social activists and academics in India. See International Human Rights Clinic at the University of Chicago Law School, National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum, and Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Replacing Myths with Facts: Sex-Selective Abortion Laws in the United States, (June 2014), available at <http://napawf.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Replacing-Myths-with-Facts-final.pdf> (last visited April 10, 2015). (last visited April 10, 2015).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=The+research+for+the+report+consisted+of+(1)+conducting+desk+research;+(2)+analyzing+quantitative+data+from+the+American+Community+Survey+(ACS)+from+2007+to+2011+and+the+National+Center+for+Health+Statistics+(NCHS)+from+1979+to+1993;+and+(3)+conducting+in-country+interviews+of+physicians,+lawyers,+government+officials,+social+activists+and+academics+in+India.+See+International+Human+Rights+Clinic+at+the+University+of+Chicago+Law+School,+National+Asian+Pacific+American+Women's+Forum,+and+Advancing+New+Standards+in+Reproductive+Health,+Replacing+Myths+with+Facts:+Sex-Selective+Abortion+Laws+in+the+United+States,+(June+2014),+available+at++(last+visited+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Pieklo, J., “Report Debunks Conservative Case for Sex-Selection Abortion Bans,” RH Reality Check, June 4, 2014, available at <rhrealitycheck.org/article/2014/06/04/report-debunks-conservative-case-sex-selection-abortion-bans> (last visited April 10, 2015).+(last+visited+April+10,+2015).>Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
International Human Rights Clinic at the University of Chicago Law School, National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum, and Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Replacing Myths with Facts: Sex-Selective Abortion Laws in the United States, (June 2014), available at <http://napawf.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Replacing-Myths-with-Facts-final.pdf> (last visited September 23, 2014). (last visited September 23, 2014).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=International+Human+Rights+Clinic+at+the+University+of+Chicago+Law+School,+National+Asian+Pacific+American+Women's+Forum,+and+Advancing+New+Standards+in+Reproductive+Health,+Replacing+Myths+with+Facts:+Sex-Selective+Abortion+Laws+in+the+United+States,+(June+2014),+available+at++(last+visited+September+23,+2014).>Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. One of the studies referenced is Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund's study “Son-Biased Sex Ratios in the 2000 United States Census,” 105 PNAS 5681, (April 2008) where researchers compared white, Chinese, Korean and Asian Indian birth rates at the first, second, and third child, finding that for second and third children in Chinese, Korean, and Asian Indian families, there appears to be a son preference. The report studies the same question with the newer census data and finds no such son preference, and actually finds Asian families have more daughters than other groups.Google Scholar
Puri, S. Adams, V. Ivey, S. Nachtgall, R., “‘There Is Such a Thing as Too Many Daughters, but Not Too Many Sons:’ A Qualitative Study of Son Preference and Fetal Sex Selection Among Indian Immigrants in the United States,” Social Science and Medicine 71, no. 7 (2011): 1170–1172. See Florida Staff Analysis, H.B. 1327, (Jan. 25, 2012), Legislative History (House Bill 1327 created Florida's proposed sex-selective abortion ban, the “Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity for Life Act”). See also 158 Cong. Rec. H3180–08 (May 30, 2012) (statement of Rep. Franks); H.R. REP. 112–496, H.R. Rep. No. 496, 112TH Cong., 2ND Sess. 2012, 2012 WL 1939420 (Leg. Hist.) (PRENATAL NONDISCRIMINATION ACT (PRENDA) OF 2012).Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
158 Cong. Rec. H3180–08 (May 30, 2012) (statement of Rep. Franks).Google Scholar
International Human Rights Clinic at the University of Chicago Law School, National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum, and Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Replacing Myths with Facts: Sex-Selective Abortion Laws in the United States (June 2014), available at <http://napawf.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Replacing-Myths-with-Facts-final.pdf> (last visited April 10, 2015) (hereinafter cited as International Human Rights Clinic). (last visited April 10, 2015) (hereinafter cited as International Human Rights Clinic).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=International+Human+Rights+Clinic+at+the+University+of+Chicago+Law+School,+National+Asian+Pacific+American+Women's+Forum,+and+Advancing+New+Standards+in+Reproductive+Health,+Replacing+Myths+with+Facts:+Sex-Selective+Abortion+Laws+in+the+United+States+(June+2014),+available+at++(last+visited+April+10,+2015)+(hereinafter+cited+as+International+Human+Rights+Clinic).>Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
See Mohapatra, , supra note 4, at 711.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
See International Human Rights Clinic, supra note 20.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
S.B 43, 81st Leg., Reg. Sess. (W. Va. 2013).Google Scholar
See International Human Rights Clinic, supra note 20.Google Scholar