Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2/2017

Open Access 01-11-2017 | Research

Abortion as empowerment: reproductive rights activism in a legally restricted context

Author: Julia McReynolds-Pérez

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Special Issue 2/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This paper analyzes the strategies used by activist health professionals in Argentina who justify providing abortion despite legal restrictions on the procedure. These “insider activists” make a case for abortion rights by linking pregnancy termination to a woman’s ability to exert agency at a key point in her reproductive life, and argue that refusing women access to the procedure constitutes a grievous health risk. This argument frames pregnancy termination as an issue of empowerment and also as a medical necessity.

Methods

This article is based on ethnographic research conducted in Argentina in 2013 and 2015, which includes in-depth interviews with abortion activists and health professionals and ethnographic observation at activist events and in clinics.

Results

During the period of my field research, the medical staff in one clinic shifted from abortion counseling, based on a harm reduction model, to legal pregnancy termination, a new mode of abortion provision where they directly provided abortions based on the legal health exception. These insider activists formalized the latter approach by creating a diagnostic instrument that frames women’s “bio-psycho-social” reasons for wishing to terminate a pregnancy as medically justified.

Conclusions

The clinical practice analyzed in this article raises important questions about the potential for health professionals to take on an activist role by making safe abortion accessible, even in a context where the procedure is highly restricted.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
In the original: consejería de pre- y post-aborto.
 
2
For more information on the abortion-counseling model, and its origins in Uruguay where it preceded the legalization of abortion in 2012, see the excellent pieces in a special issue of the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics on Reducing Maternal Mortality by Preventing Unsafe Abortion: The Uruguayan Experience [31, 35‐42].
 
3
The standard procedure for pharmaceutical or medication abortion is a combination of mifepristone, which loosens the uterine lining, followed 1–2 days later by misoprostol, which causes uterine contractions. This full regimen is most effective. But in places where abortion is legally restricted, misoprostol is regularly taken by itself, though it is less effective.
 
4
In the original: “no exige la configuración de un daño, sino su possible ocurrencia.”
 
5
Mifepristone is the other half of the pharmaceutical abortion regime, typically used in combination with misoprostol.
 
Literature
1.
2.
Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación Argentina. F., A.L. s/medida autosatisfactiva. 2012.
3.
Sutton B, Borland E. Framing abortion rights in Argentina’s encuentros nacionales de mujeres. Fem Stud. 2013;39:194–234.
4.
5.
Billings DL. Misoprostol alone for early medical abortion in a Latin American clinic setting. Reprod Health Matters. 2004;12:57–64.CrossRefPubMed
6.
McReynolds-Pérez J. Misoprostol for the masses: the activist-led proliferation of pharmaceutical abortion in Argentina. Madison: University of Wisconsin; 2014.
7.
McReynolds-Pérez J. No doctors required: lay activist expertise and pharmaceutical abortion in Argentina. Signs J Women Cult Soc. 2017;42:349–75.CrossRef
8.
Kabeer N. Resources, agency, achievements: reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. Dev Change. 1999;30:435.CrossRef
9.
Uberoi D, de Bruyn M. Human rights versus legal control over women’s reproductive self-determination. Health Hum Rights Int J. 2013;15:161–74.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Upadhyay UD, Gipson JD, Withers M, Lewis S, Ciaraldi EJ, Fraser A, et al. Women’s empowerment and fertility: a review of the literature. Soc Sci Med 1982. 2014;0:111–20.
15.
Link BG, Phelan J. Social conditions as fundamental causes of disease. J Health Soc Behav. 1995;35:80–94.CrossRef
16.
17.
Biggs MA, Neuhaus JM, Foster DG. Mental health diagnoses 3 years after receiving or being denied an abortion in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2015;105:2557–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Roberts SC, Biggs MA, Chibber KS, Gould H, Rocca CH, Foster DG. Risk of violence from the man involved in the pregnancy after receiving or being denied an abortion. BMC Med. 2014;12:144.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
20.
Fernandez S. Travelling ideas en el Río de la Plata: la implementación del modelo uruguayo de reducción de daños y riesgos frente al aborto provocado en condiciones de riesgo en Argentina. In: XI Jornadas de Sociología. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Buenos Aires. Buenos Aires; 2015. http://​www.​aacademica.​org/​000-061/​434. Accessed 7 Oct 2017.
21.
Erdman JN. Harm reduction, human rights, and access to information on safer abortion. Int J Gynaecol Obstet Off Organ Int Fed Gynaecol Obstet. 2012;118:83–6.CrossRef
22.
23.
Dosso D. Consejería de pre y post aborto. Efectos de la intervención en la salud integral de las mujeres atendidas en el CAPS Mercedes Sosa del municipio de Morón. Perspect Bioét. 2013;18:75–93.
24.
da Silva Dal Pizzol T, Knop FP, Mengue SS. Prenatal exposure to misoprostol and congenital anomalies: systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Toxicol. 2006;22:666–71.CrossRefPubMed
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
González Vélez AC. “The health exception”: a means of expanding access to legal abortion. Reprod Health Matters. 2012;20:22–9.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Pettinicchio D. Institutional activism: reconsidering the insider/outsider dichotomy. Sociol Compass. 2012;6:499–510.CrossRef
31.
Matía MG, Trumper EC, Fures NO, Orchuela J. A replication of the Uruguayan model in the province of Buenos Aires, Argentina, as a public policy for reducing abortion-related maternal mortality. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;134(Supplement 1):S31–4.CrossRef
32.
Haidet P, Paterniti DA. “Building” a history rather than “taking” one: a perspective on information sharing during the medical interview. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1134–40.CrossRefPubMed
33.
34.
35.
Antón J-I, Ferre Z, Triunfo P. Evolution of adolescent fertility after decriminalization of abortion in Montevideo, Uruguay. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;134(Supplement 1):S24–7.CrossRef
36.
Briozzo L. From risk and harm reduction to decriminalizing abortion: the Uruguayan model for women’s rights. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;134(Supplement 1):S3–6.CrossRef
37.
Briozzo L, Gómez Ponce de León R, Tomasso G, Faúndes A. Overall and abortion-related maternal mortality rates in Uruguay over the past 25 years and their association with policies and actions aimed at protecting women’s rights. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;134(Supplement 1):S20–3.CrossRef
38.
Coppola F, Briozzo L, Nozar F, Fiol V, Greif D. Conscientious objection as a barrier for implementing voluntary termination of pregnancy in Uruguay: gynecologists’ attitudes and behavior. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;134(Supplement 1):S16–9.CrossRef
39.
Faúndes A. What can we do as gynecologists/obstetricians to reduce unsafe abortion and its consequences? the Uruguayan response. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;134(Supplement 1):S1–2.CrossRef
40.
Fiol V, Rieppi L, Aguirre R, Nozar M, Gorgoroso M, Coppola F, et al. The role of medical abortion in the implementation of the law on voluntary termination of pregnancy in Uruguay. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;134(Supplement 1):S12–5.CrossRef
41.
Labandera A, Gorgoroso M, Briozzo L. Implementation of the risk and harm reduction strategy against unsafe abortion in Uruguay: from a university hospital to the entire country. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;134(Supplement 1):S7–11.CrossRef
42.
Nozar F, Greif D, Coppola F, Fiol V, Briozzo L. Legal termination of pregnancy as an opportunity for expanding postabortion contraception: experience at the Pereira rossell hospital, Montevideo, Uruguay. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;134(Supplement 1):S28–30.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Abortion as empowerment: reproductive rights activism in a legally restricted context
Author
Julia McReynolds-Pérez
Publication date
01-11-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue Special Issue 2/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1498-y

Other articles of this Special Issue 2/2017

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2/2017 Go to the issue

Research

Women’s empowerment related to pregnancy and childbirth: introduction to special issue

Research

Conceptualizing pathways linking women’s empowerment and prematurity in developing countries

Research

Randomized controlled pilot of a group antenatal care model and the sociodemographic factors associated with pregnancy-related empowerment in sub-Saharan Africa

Case Report

The role of human rights litigation in improving access to reproductive health care and achieving reductions in maternal mortality

Research

Composite measures of women’s empowerment and their association with maternal mortality in low-income countries

Research

Do the status and empowerment of mothers predict their daughters’ reproductive outcomes?