From Bad Women to Mad Women: A Genealogical Analysis of Abortion Discourses in Aotearoa New Zealand

Although abortion discourses are often polarised into 'a woman's right to choose' versus a 'foetus's right to life', mental health is emerging as a prevailing paradigm for conceiving of abortion in New Zealand. Abortion remains criminalised in New Zealand and a literal reading of the legislation governing abortion would suggest that it is only available in limited circumstances. However, due to a broad interpretation of the mental health ground, less than two percent of requests for abortions are refused (Abortion Supervisory Committee, 2003). As Myra Marx Ferree and others argue, the institutional context of abortion law affects which discourses become culturally resonant (Ferree, Gamson, Gerhards, and Rucht, 2002). The harnessing of the mental health discourse in relation to abortion reshapes women's status as subjects in reproductive decision making. Whereas in the 1930s and 1960s women were morally condemned for making a selfish decision or murdering an autonomous foetus respectively, the mental health discourse calls women's very mental capacity to choose into question. Thus, women are painted as unfortunate victims of circumstance who require guidance through the law or psychological support. The argument for a woman's right to choose conceives women as autonomous agents who are best placed to make reproductive decisions governing their bodies and their lives. However, in challenging women's status as moral actors, the mental health paradigm insidiously challenges women's very ability to choose abortion.