TY - JOUR
T1 - Transgressing biomedical and legal boundaries: The “enticing and hazardous” challenges and promises of a Self-Managed Abortion multiverse
AU - Nandagiri, Rishita
AU - Pizzarossa, Lucía Berro
N1 - Funding Information:
Lucía Berro Pizzarossa's work on this manuscript is supported by the Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Dutch Research Council) , Rubicon Grant 019.201SG.026 .
Funding Information:
Rishita Nandagiri's initial work on this manuscript, particularly at the CHLS workshop, was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (grant number ES/V006282/1 ), as part of her ESRC Postdoctoral Fellowship (2020−2021) at the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors
PY - 2023/9/1
Y1 - 2023/9/1
N2 - Globally, abortion has largely been understood, researched, and regulated within a medico-legal paradigm. However, self-managed abortion (SMA) questions the centrality of the law and bio-medical paradigms, as well as the presumed individuality of abortion decision-making that it is predicated on. SMA offers an “enticing and hazardous” (Donnan & Magowan, 2009, p. 9) challenge to traditional legal and biomedical understandings of and approaches to abortion, as well as to social, religious, (pro)creative conventions. In this paper, we detail how abortion remains exceptionalised, setting conditions for “permissible transgressions”. We explore how SMA fundamentally challenges and alters meanings of abortion, and its care and provision: from whose authority and knowledge is valued and centred, to the environments that abortion is possible in, to issuing a broader challenge around how abortion itself is understood and depicted, and how SMA, thus, represents a deliberate move towards new ways of making meaning and (re)imagining abortions.
AB - Globally, abortion has largely been understood, researched, and regulated within a medico-legal paradigm. However, self-managed abortion (SMA) questions the centrality of the law and bio-medical paradigms, as well as the presumed individuality of abortion decision-making that it is predicated on. SMA offers an “enticing and hazardous” (Donnan & Magowan, 2009, p. 9) challenge to traditional legal and biomedical understandings of and approaches to abortion, as well as to social, religious, (pro)creative conventions. In this paper, we detail how abortion remains exceptionalised, setting conditions for “permissible transgressions”. We explore how SMA fundamentally challenges and alters meanings of abortion, and its care and provision: from whose authority and knowledge is valued and centred, to the environments that abortion is possible in, to issuing a broader challenge around how abortion itself is understood and depicted, and how SMA, thus, represents a deliberate move towards new ways of making meaning and (re)imagining abortions.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85167573370&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.wsif.2023.102799
DO - 10.1016/j.wsif.2023.102799
M3 - Article
VL - 100
JO - Women's Studies International Forum
JF - Women's Studies International Forum
IS - September-October 2023
M1 - 102799
ER -
