scholarly journals Lifting the cloak of secrecy: Experiences of providing crisis pregnancy counselling in a changing legislative context in Ireland

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meg Ryan ◽  
Ann Nolan ◽  
Frédérique Vallières
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Pregnancy

Crisis Pregnancy and the Colonization of the Clinic

2019 ◽  
pp. 111-140
Author(s):  
Natalie Fixmer-Oraiz
Keyword(s):  
Homeland Security ◽  
Teen Pregnancy ◽  
Popular Media ◽  
Teen Motherhood ◽  
Reproductive Politics ◽  
Security Culture ◽  
Health Clinics ◽  
Teen Mom ◽  
Crisis Pregnancy

This chapter explores how rhetorics of crisis have reshaped contemporary reproductive politics. First, it examines the significance of crisis teen pregnancy narratives in popular media (e.g., Juno, 16 and Pregnant, Glee, and Teen Mom) and how these narratives manage collective anxieties over abortion, adoption, and teen motherhood. It traces these trends alongside the colonization of comprehensive women’s health clinics by the evangelical crisis pregnancy center movement. The logic of homeland security culture, present in this case study through rhetorics of “crisis,” fuels the differential protection of domestic bodies and works to produce and reproduce national identity through the bodies of particular women and families.

The Supreme Court’s Crisis Pregnancy Center Case — Implications for Health Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 379 (16) ◽  
pp. 1489-1491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy E. Parmet ◽  
Micah L. Berman ◽  
Jason A. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Health Law ◽  
Crisis Pregnancy

The Invention of Postabortion Syndrome

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karissa Haugeberg
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Health Risks ◽  
Psychological Trauma ◽  
First Century ◽  
Medical Community ◽  
Majority Opinion ◽  
Inaccurate Information ◽  
Twenty First Century ◽  
Crisis Pregnancy

This chapter traces how crisis pregnancy center volunteers popularized medically inaccurate information about the health risks of abortion beginning in the 1970s. Anonymous tracts purportedly written by women who had abortions and regretted them circulated in prolife circles. By the 1980s, women who called themselves “abortion survivors” traveled the nation, speaking to church and prolife groups about their regret over having had abortions. Prolife physicians legitimized these anecdotes by writing articles that falsely claimed that abortion caused breast cancer and psychological trauma. By the twenty-first century, prolife physicians and women “abortion survivors” had convinced jurists—incorrectly—that the medical community was divided over the question of whether abortion harmed women. This constructed debate framed the Supreme Court’s 2003 majority opinion in Gonzales v. Carhart

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document