Anti-Abortion Laws: Who Benefits And Why?

Abortion laws are being created and enforced in many countries, with varying degrees of restrictiveness. These laws often reflect the values and beliefs of the governing political and religious institutions, and their impact on access to abortion varies greatly. In some countries, abortion is highly restricted or banned, while in others, it is more widely accessible and accepted as a basic healthcare service. The creation and enforcement of anti-abortion laws have far-reaching consequences, affecting people's lives, health, and well-being, especially those from marginalised communities.

The criminalisation of abortion

One of the main arguments put forth by those in favour of criminalising abortion is the notion of fetal personhood. This perspective holds that a fetus is a person with rights and, therefore, deserves legal protection from the moment of conception. This belief has been a driving force behind the push to criminalise abortion, with the aim of granting legal rights to fetuses and holding those who perform or seek abortions accountable for terminating a "life".

However, the criminalisation of abortion has been criticised for its disproportionate impact on marginalised communities, including low-income individuals, people of colour, and those from historically marginalised backgrounds. In countries where abortion is criminalised or heavily restricted, individuals often resort to unsafe and clandestine abortions, putting their health and lives at risk. This is particularly true for those who cannot afford to travel to another country or access private healthcare services.

Lastly, the criminalisation of abortion has significant implications for access to healthcare and the well-being of pregnant individuals. Healthcare providers in states with abortion bans face challenges in providing the best medical care to their patients, as they must navigate complex legal landscapes and risk criminal prosecution. This situation has made it increasingly difficult for hospitals in these states to attract and retain obstetricians and gynecologists, impacting the quality of reproductive healthcare services available.

The role of religion and morality in anti-abortion laws

Religion and morality are closely intertwined in the abortion debate, and this is reflected in the creation and enforcement of anti-abortion laws. While not all religions agree on their stance on abortion, it is undeniable that religious beliefs have influenced legislation and shaped public opinion on the issue.

In the United States, the Catholic Church has been a prominent opponent of abortion, with the US Conference of Catholic Bishops founding the National Right to Life organization in 1968 to coordinate state-level activities opposing abortion. The Catholic Church teaches that abortion is "gravely contrary to the moral law" and that it is a sin against nature to reject God's gift of life. This religious perspective has informed the Church's advocacy for legal restrictions on abortion and shaped the beliefs of its adherents.

Other conservative religious groups, including those with Protestant members, have also been driving forces behind the anti-abortion movement. These groups often frame their opposition to abortion in religious terms, such as the belief that life begins at conception or that abortion is a sin. For example, an official from Operation Save America, a militant anti-abortion group, stated that "Satan wants to kill innocent babies, demean marriage, and distort the image of God."

The religious underpinnings of the anti-abortion movement are evident in the rhetoric and signage of anti-abortion rallies, which often feature religious admonitions like "pray for life" and "pray to end abortion." Religion also influences the strategies employed by anti-abortion activists, who may invoke religious arguments to justify their position or appeal to religious authority figures for support.

It is important to note that not all religious groups are united in their opposition to abortion. Some liberal denominations, such as the United Church of Christ and the National Council of Jewish Women, have affirmed the right of women to make their own reproductive choices, including the decision to terminate a pregnancy. These groups may view abortion as a matter of religious freedom, allowing individuals to follow their personal convictions.

The role of religion in the abortion debate extends beyond the creation of anti-abortion laws. Religious beliefs can also shape how individuals and communities perceive and respond to abortion. For example, women who obtain abortions may experience stigma and judgment from religious communities, family members, or partners who condemn their decision. This religiously informed abortion stigma can lead to feelings of guilt, shame, and isolation, even among those who do not personally hold religious beliefs.

Additionally, religion can influence the decision-making process for women considering abortion. Some women may struggle with spiritual or moral conflict, questioning whether abortion aligns with their personal values or the doctrines of their faith. This internalized stigma can be a significant factor in their experience, even if they ultimately choose to have an abortion.

In conclusion, religion and morality play a significant role in the creation and enforcement of anti-abortion laws. The religious beliefs and values of individuals and communities shape their attitudes towards abortion, influencing both the legal landscape and the broader social discourse surrounding this contentious issue.

The impact of anti-abortion laws on marginalised communities

Anti-abortion laws have a disproportionate impact on marginalised communities, including low-income people, people of colour, refugees, migrants, LGBTIQA+ people, racialised and Indigenous people, and those living in rural areas. These communities already face barriers to accessing healthcare, and anti-abortion laws further compound these difficulties.

In countries with restrictive abortion laws, such as the United States, Sierra Leone, Poland, and Morocco, people seeking abortions often have to travel long distances to access safe and legal abortion services. This can be incredibly difficult for those who cannot afford to take time off work or travel to another country or state. As a result, many people are forced to resort to unsafe abortions, which can have fatal consequences.

The criminalisation of abortion also intersects with other forms of discrimination and marginalisation. For example, people who use substances, including legal and illegal drugs, may be targeted for prosecution under fetal personhood laws. Additionally, transgender and gender non-conforming people are more likely to report facing harassment and discrimination in medical settings, further deterring them from seeking abortion care.

The impact of anti-abortion laws extends beyond the inability to terminate a pregnancy. For some, carrying a pregnancy to term can endanger their life, disrupt their educational and career plans, and compound existing disadvantages. This is particularly true for marginalised communities, who already face systemic barriers and inequalities.

The movement against abortion has evolved over time, with conservative Protestants in the US South now dominating a movement that was once predominantly Catholic and based in the Northeast and Midwest. This shift has led to a more punitive approach, with a focus on criminalising not just abortion providers but also patients. While leading anti-abortion groups still reject calls to criminalise abortion seekers, a growing group of self-proclaimed abolitionists within the movement is pushing for this change.

The influence of political agendas on anti-abortion laws

The creation and enforcement of anti-abortion laws are influenced by various political agendas, reflecting the complex and multifaceted nature of the abortion debate. At the core of this issue is the contentious question of when life begins and the relative rights of the pregnant person and the embryo or fetus.

One of the primary drivers of anti-abortion laws is the belief in fetal personhood, which holds that a fetus should be granted the same legal rights as a person from the moment of conception. This belief has been a central tenet of the anti-abortion movement since the 1960s, and it has gained significant traction within conservative political circles. The push for fetal personhood is closely tied to efforts to amend the US Constitution to include fetal personhood explicitly, a goal that has been included in the Republican National Platform since the 1980s. While this language was omitted in 2024, the underlying sentiment remains, with coded references suggesting that the Constitution already recognises fetal personhood.

The rise of conservative Protestantism in the US South has also influenced the political agenda surrounding abortion. This shift in demographics has led to a growing alliance between anti-abortion groups and conservative Protestant organisations, resulting in a more punitive approach to abortion and a stronger emphasis on criminalisation. This perspective has gained support within the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant body in the US, further shaping the political landscape.

Additionally, the historical context of abortion laws in the US cannot be ignored. Abortion was a regular part of life for women in the colonial era, and it was provided by skilled midwives, nurses, and other unlicensed women's healthcare providers. However, starting around the time of the Civil War, a coalition of male doctors, with support from the Catholic Church and others, led a movement to outlaw abortion and consolidate power within the male-dominated medical profession. This shift in authority contributed to the growing number of anti-abortion laws and the marginalisation of women's reproductive rights.

The political agenda behind anti-abortion laws is also driven by systemic racism and the desire to control the bodies of marginalised communities, particularly Black women. During slavery, enslaved Black women were prohibited from having abortions as they were considered valuable property. Even after the abolition of slavery, societal control over Black women's bodies persisted, and they continue to face judgment and blame for their reproductive choices. Additionally, laws restricting access to abortion, such as the Hyde Amendment, disproportionately impact Black and Latino communities due to systemic racism in economic practices and policies.

The historical context of anti-abortion laws

In the United States, abortion was a regular part of women's lives from colonial times until the mid-1800s, when it was outlawed. Prior to "quickening" (the archaic term for foetal movement, which usually happens after four months of pregnancy), abortion was permitted under common law. Reproductive care, including abortion, was provided by skilled midwives, nurses, and other unlicensed women's health care providers.

The first "right-to-life" movement emerged in the mid-19th century, driven by physicians seeking to increase their professional status and authority. They pushed for anti-abortion laws in state legislatures, which succeeded in making abortion a crime by 1900 in all states. However, these laws included a therapeutic exception, allowing licensed physicians to provide abortions to preserve the life of the mother. This made doctors the arbiters of abortion's morality and legality, creating a large black market for women who couldn't access abortions through medical channels.

The modern anti-abortion political movement emerged in the 1960s as a response to growing calls for abortion law reform. Small groups of Catholic doctors, nurses, lawyers, and housewives, supported by the National Council of Catholic Bishops, opposed liberalisation. Despite their efforts, 11 states liberalised their abortion laws in the late 1960s, and in 1973, the Supreme Court established the legal right to abortion nationwide with the Roe v. Wade decision.

Since then, anti-abortion activists have focused on conveying their message about foetal rights while minimising attention on pregnant women. Graphic images of aborted foetuses, models, jewellery, and clothes have been used to personify the foetus and include it in American political culture. Additionally, activists have linked their campaign to civil rights and human rights work, comparing legal abortion to the Holocaust and the Dred Scott decision, which ruled that Black people were not US citizens.

In the 1980s and 1990s, evangelical Christians joined the movement in large numbers, with some forming radical groups like Operation Rescue, which sought to end abortion by "any means necessary". They performed "rescues" by creating human blockades in front of clinics, filling local jails, and making it incredibly difficult to obtain an abortion.

During this period, anti-abortion activists also worked to make abortion access more difficult at the state level, resulting in laws requiring parental notification, informed consent, and waiting periods. The Supreme Court validated these restrictions in the 1992 Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey decision, crafting a new rationale that allowed regulations as long as they didn't place an "undue burden" on women seeking abortions.

Today, anti-abortion laws and restrictions continue to be passed, often with exceptions for cases of rape, incest, or to protect the life of the mother. However, obtaining abortions under these exceptions can be difficult or impossible due to confusing and restrictive requirements, such as involving law enforcement and mandating reporting of assaults.

Frequently asked questions