Love Them Both? Pro-Woman, Pro-Life: New Policy Frames in the Anti-Abortion Movement Ebba Wallin Eriksson Supervisor: Josefina Erikson Bachelor Thesis, Political Science Department of Government Uppsala University, Spring 2020 Word count: 11281 Page count: 42 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 3 1.1. Aim and Research Questions 4 1.2. Disposition 5 1.3. Definitions 5 2. Theoretical Framework 6 2.1. The American Anti-abortion Movement: Before and After Roe v. Wade 6 2.2. Emergence of the Pro-Woman, Pro-Life Faction 7 2.3. Frame Analysis and Frame Alignment Processes 8 2.4. Frame Extension and Frame Transformation in the Pro-Life Movement 10 3. Research Design 11 3.1. Empirical Research of Frames 12 3.2. Choice of Method and Analytical Framework 14 3.3. Material and Context 15 3.4. Sample 17 4. Findings and Discussion 18 4.1. Findings 18 4.1.1 The Fetal Rights Frame 18 4.1.2 The Pro-Death Frame 21 4.1.3. The Selfish Mother Frame 22 4.1.4. The Coercion Frame 24 4.1.5. The Medical Advances Frame 25 4.1.6. The PAS Frame 26 4.2. Discussion 27 5. Conclusion 30 References 32 Appendix 37 2 1. Introduction In 1973, the US Supreme Court established that abortion is a constitutional right with the landmark ruling Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113). The Court recognized fetus viability as the earliest ​ ​ ​ stage of when the state may prohibit a woman from obtaining an abortion. Viability, defined as the point of fetal development where the fetus can survive outside the womb, was estimated to occur at the gestational age of 28 weeks. This decision was largely upheld in Planned Parenthood ​ of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (505 U.S. 833 1992), when the Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution indeed protects a pregnant woman’s liberty to choose abortion. In spite of these rulings, abortion has remained a divisive and widely debated issue in the United States, and in 2019, eleven states passed bills that impose restrictions on abortion and challenge the Roe ruling. Alabama enacted the harshest bill to date with a complete ban on abortion. Others, like Georgia and Ohio, prohibit the procedure after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, which is around six weeks into the pregnancy. Along with these fetal heartbeat bills, other states ​ ​ ban the performance at eight and eighteen weeks, respectively. With the 2018 appointment of Brett Kavanaugh rendering a conservative majority in the Supreme Court, bill makers hope to challenge Roe v Wade, creating new precedent on abortion law in the United States (Lai 2019). ​ ​ Alabama Governor Kay Ivey said when signing the bill that “it is time, once again, for the US ​ Supreme Court to revisit this important matter, and they believe this act may bring about the best opportunity for this to occur'' (Reilly 2019). The main arguments of the self-described pro-life movement for abortion regulations have since ​ ​ ​ ​ the 1973 ruling been centered around the rights of the fetus. The dominant framing has thus been one constructed around fetal life and fetal rights, where the innocent and defenseless fetus’s right to life is opposed by the pregnant woman’s interests in a maternal-fetal conflict (Ferree, Gamson, ​ Gerhards, and Rucht 2002). However, some scholars argue that this framing has shifted, with the ​ ​ emergence of a pro-woman, pro-life, or PWPL faction of the antiabortion movement that instead ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ argues that abortion is bad for women (Rose 2011, Trumpy 2014). These woman-centered actors thus challenge the previously shared notion that pro-choice movements are concerned with 3 protecting women’s rights, whilst the pro-life movement focuses on protecting the fetal right to life. Through these PWPL arguments, the pro-life movement simultaneously attempts to change movement audiences views of them, as well as of pro-choice actors whom they cast as anti-woman (Oaks 2009). A conservative-leaning majority of the Supreme Court have created new opportunities for the pro-life movement, resulting in mobilization around the 1973 Roe. v. Wade ruling once again. With new pro-woman framing strategies gaining ground, the recent upsurge of abortion restrictions raises questions of how we could understand this trend. This essay will explore closer what frames are utilized in the latest wave of policy, and how the abortion issue is approached by contemporary policy actors. 1.1. Aim and Research Questions The aim of this study is to understand the way the policy issue of abortion is framed in the recent bills. Policies are not only instrumental but expressive– they communicate values and beliefs. In addition to conveying collective identity, policy frames shape our understanding and perception of different matters (Yanow, 2000). The understanding of a specific problem prompts certain suggested courses of action. In other words, the way a policy is framed has direct effects on citizens’ lives. In order to investigate this, a frame analysis of recent policy will be conducted, in which various frames will be identified and discussed. The first research question this thesis will address is then: How is abortion framed in recent U.S. anti-abortion policy? ​ In addition to this overarching inquiry, this essay will investigate the presence and extent of woman-centric arguments, as well as their interplay with traditional pro-life narratives. It will examine arguments surrounding the seemingly contradictory pro-woman, pro-life stance, and the way themes of rights, morality, and science are used to shape pro-life frames. This departure will allow for an exploration of the proposed frame shift, and specifically, its place in policy. This essay will thus explore if pro-woman arguments have gained a foothold in American legislation. 4 The second research question is then: How has pro-woman, pro-life arguments influenced policy ​ frames? 1.2. Disposition The first section of this essay will provide previous research and a brief background of the American anti-abortion movement and the emergence of the pro-woman, pro-life faction. After this, a theoretical framework on social movement theory, specifically on frames and frame alignment will be provided. This will be followed by previous research on frame alignment in the pro-life movement. The third section of this essay will present the scholarly contributions on empirical frame analysis as well as the used research design, including methodology and material. In the fourth section, findings will be presented and discussed. Lastly, this essay will be concluded with final remarks and suggestions for further research on the topic. 1.3. Definitions In this essay, the terms anti-abortion and pro-life will be used interchangeably. Likewise, the terms abortion rights and pro-choice will be used synonymously. These terms will refer exclusively to the abortion movements in the United States. Both pro-life and pro-choice are purposefully politically charged labels, as the use of pro-life implies that opposers are anti-life or pro-death, whilst the term pro-choice implies the existence of an anti-choice movement. These are however the most common self-descriptions in the debate regarding the moral and legal status of abortion– in a poll by Gallup, only 6 % of respondents did not consider themselves pro-choice nor pro-life (2019). The pro-life movement, then, refers in this essay to the informal network of anti-abortion supporters that mobilize to achieve common goals (Tarrow, 1998). This study is not intended to evaluate the veracity of any medical definitions, scientific evidence or factual claims used in the debate. Instead, what will be investigated is the way in which these are understood and employed. Consequently, no working definitions will be given of the discussed subjects– woman, fetus, mother, and child. Still, it should be noted that both women and others with female-assigned reproductive systems are affected by abortion restrictions. 5 Likewise, many women do not have female-assigned reproductive systems. These dimensions will however be omitted from this report. 2. Theoretical Framework In this segment, a theoretical framework and previous research will be provided. Initially, background and previous research of the pro-life movement will be presented. In the following section, the key concept of frames will be introduced and conceptualized within social movement theory. This will be followed by the specific previous study of frame alignment in the pro-life movement. 2.1. The American Anti-abortion Movement: Before and After Roe v. Wade In the late 1960s, the conflict surrounding abortion grew more and more contentious. With the feminist movement came new demands for the decriminalization of abortion, as a means to achieve equality through sexual freedom and control over one’s reproduction. In the summer of 1972, two out of three Americans believed that abortion should be a decision solely between a woman and her doctor. According to the poll, Republican voters agreed with this statement to a larger extent than Democratic voters, by 68% and 59% respectively (Greenhouse & Siegel 2011 p. 2031). With a growing support for the decriminalization of abortion, Catholics began to mobilize nationwide in opposition to the abortion rights advocates. Republican political strategists thus began encouraging Richard Nixon to change his stance on abortion, to attract the Catholic voters– traditionally a Democratic demographic (Greenhouse & Siegel 2011 p. 2057). This strategy fits into a larger Republican positioning toward the loss of traditional values. The Republican Party attempted to attract social conservatives by placing themselves in opposition to abortion, drug use, and the anti-war movement (Greenhouse & Siegel 2011 p. 2056). Nixon won the election and gained support from 52% of the country’s Catholics, compared to 33% in his 1968 presidential win (Novak 2012).