“If somebody wants an abortion, nobody should override their decision”: Modern Canadian perspectives on abortion in relation to artificial womb technology
{"title":"“If somebody wants an abortion, nobody should override their decision”: Modern Canadian perspectives on abortion in relation to artificial womb technology","authors":"Srishti Hukku , Lisa L. Wynn , Angel M. Foster","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2025.100529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Recent advancements in artificial womb technology (AWT) – extrauterine gestation – have led to significant bioethical debates on the future of access to abortion. Anthropologists have leveraged concepts of stratified reproduction and reproductive governance to shed light on how different individuals are encouraged/discouraged to reproduce and how key actors such as the state mobilize the capacity for reproduction. As such, we aimed to explore the perspectives of Canadian citizens on the provision of abortion services if AWT were to become a reality. From September 2020 to February 2021, we conducted a qualitative bilingual community-based survey with 343 Canadian citizens and 41 semi-structured in-depth interviews with a subset of survey respondents in English and French. We analyzed the survey data using descriptive statistics and the interviews for content and themes using inductive and deductive techniques. Our study found that when assessing the potentiality of AWT, participants centered reproductive choice, bodily autonomy, and family planning in decision-making. Participants further expressed that any efforts at governance of AWT should ensure that the technology complements, rather than curtails, existing methods of reproduction and assisted reproduction, and enhances choice for those desiring parenthood. For our participants, AWT was seen as a medical device that had the potential to improve lives while ensuring that abortion-seekers’ rights to control their bodies and reproduction were not impeded. Our study demonstrates that the current ban against the development and use of AWT is a form of <em>gestational stratification</em> that privileges those with access to a uterus for gestation which limits reproductive choice. Policymakers and legislators should consider these perspectives when developing policies and regulations at the intersection of abortion and new assisted human reproduction technologies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"7 ","pages":"Article 100529"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667321525000071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Recent advancements in artificial womb technology (AWT) – extrauterine gestation – have led to significant bioethical debates on the future of access to abortion. Anthropologists have leveraged concepts of stratified reproduction and reproductive governance to shed light on how different individuals are encouraged/discouraged to reproduce and how key actors such as the state mobilize the capacity for reproduction. As such, we aimed to explore the perspectives of Canadian citizens on the provision of abortion services if AWT were to become a reality. From September 2020 to February 2021, we conducted a qualitative bilingual community-based survey with 343 Canadian citizens and 41 semi-structured in-depth interviews with a subset of survey respondents in English and French. We analyzed the survey data using descriptive statistics and the interviews for content and themes using inductive and deductive techniques. Our study found that when assessing the potentiality of AWT, participants centered reproductive choice, bodily autonomy, and family planning in decision-making. Participants further expressed that any efforts at governance of AWT should ensure that the technology complements, rather than curtails, existing methods of reproduction and assisted reproduction, and enhances choice for those desiring parenthood. For our participants, AWT was seen as a medical device that had the potential to improve lives while ensuring that abortion-seekers’ rights to control their bodies and reproduction were not impeded. Our study demonstrates that the current ban against the development and use of AWT is a form of gestational stratification that privileges those with access to a uterus for gestation which limits reproductive choice. Policymakers and legislators should consider these perspectives when developing policies and regulations at the intersection of abortion and new assisted human reproduction technologies.