Pub Date : 2021-10-29DOI: 10.1177/09646639211046134
Harry Blagg, Victoria Hovane, Tamara Tulich, D. Raye, S. May, Thomas Worrigal
Family violence within Aboriginal communities continues to attract considerable scholarly, governmental and public attention in Australia. While rates of victimization are significantly higher than non-Aboriginal rates, Aboriginal women remain suspicious of the ‘carceral feminism’ remedy, arguing that family violence is a legacy of colonialism, systemic racism, and the intergenerational impacts of trauma, requiring its own distinctive suite of responses, ‘uncoupled’ from the dominant feminist narrative of gender inequality, coercive control and patriarchy. We conclude that achieving meaningful reductions in family violence hinges on a decolonising process that shifts power from settler to Aboriginal structures. Aboriginal peoples are increasingly advocating for strengths-based and community-led solutions that are culturally safe, involve Aboriginal justice models, and recognises the salience of Aboriginal Law and Culture. This paper is based on qualitative research in six locations in northern Australia where traditional patterns of Aboriginal Law and Culture are robust. Employing a decolonising methodology, we explore the views of Elders in these communities regarding the existing role of Law and Culture, their criticisms of settler law, and their ambitions for a greater degree of partnership between mainstream and Aboriginal law. The paper advances a number of ideas, based on these discussions, that might facilitate a paradigm shift in theory and practice regarding intervention in family violence.
{"title":"Law, Culture and Decolonisation: The Perspectives of Aboriginal Elders on Family Violence in Australia","authors":"Harry Blagg, Victoria Hovane, Tamara Tulich, D. Raye, S. May, Thomas Worrigal","doi":"10.1177/09646639211046134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211046134","url":null,"abstract":"Family violence within Aboriginal communities continues to attract considerable scholarly, governmental and public attention in Australia. While rates of victimization are significantly higher than non-Aboriginal rates, Aboriginal women remain suspicious of the ‘carceral feminism’ remedy, arguing that family violence is a legacy of colonialism, systemic racism, and the intergenerational impacts of trauma, requiring its own distinctive suite of responses, ‘uncoupled’ from the dominant feminist narrative of gender inequality, coercive control and patriarchy. We conclude that achieving meaningful reductions in family violence hinges on a decolonising process that shifts power from settler to Aboriginal structures. Aboriginal peoples are increasingly advocating for strengths-based and community-led solutions that are culturally safe, involve Aboriginal justice models, and recognises the salience of Aboriginal Law and Culture. This paper is based on qualitative research in six locations in northern Australia where traditional patterns of Aboriginal Law and Culture are robust. Employing a decolonising methodology, we explore the views of Elders in these communities regarding the existing role of Law and Culture, their criticisms of settler law, and their ambitions for a greater degree of partnership between mainstream and Aboriginal law. The paper advances a number of ideas, based on these discussions, that might facilitate a paradigm shift in theory and practice regarding intervention in family violence.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76721479","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-23DOI: 10.1177/09646639211053715
A. Young
control over bodies, but that political control has been drawn from diseases done to the body. Refuge Beyond Reach begins and concludes with reference to the importance of sanctuary – a physical site of refuge. While sanctuary is a term more recently adopted for its connotations to political protection, COVID-19 reminds us that sanctuary also suggests a place of physical healing. In other contexts, it foregrounds the need for conservation efforts to protect the natural environment. We are now more aware than ever before that refugee populations will continue to seek sanctuary from a range of complex and overlapping political, physical, and environmental hazards. The final corrective I would offer to this book is that FitzGerald’s concluding call that civil society must rise to the challenge of guarding “paths to refuge from the duplicitous attempts to close them” (p. 265) must also be the guiding principle to protect all those who seek refuge, whether political or otherwise.
{"title":"Book Review: Law and Disorder: Sovereignty, Protest, Atmosphere","authors":"A. Young","doi":"10.1177/09646639211053715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211053715","url":null,"abstract":"control over bodies, but that political control has been drawn from diseases done to the body. Refuge Beyond Reach begins and concludes with reference to the importance of sanctuary – a physical site of refuge. While sanctuary is a term more recently adopted for its connotations to political protection, COVID-19 reminds us that sanctuary also suggests a place of physical healing. In other contexts, it foregrounds the need for conservation efforts to protect the natural environment. We are now more aware than ever before that refugee populations will continue to seek sanctuary from a range of complex and overlapping political, physical, and environmental hazards. The final corrective I would offer to this book is that FitzGerald’s concluding call that civil society must rise to the challenge of guarding “paths to refuge from the duplicitous attempts to close them” (p. 265) must also be the guiding principle to protect all those who seek refuge, whether political or otherwise.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83488237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-11DOI: 10.1177/09646639211043801
Manal Totry-Jubran
This paper seeks to enrich existing empirical research on substantive representation in the judicial system by exploring a case study of the Honorable Justice (retired) Salim Joubran, the first ethnic-minority judge appointed to the Supreme Court of Israel. By employing a dual methodology of qualitative discourse analysis and dissenting quantitative studies, the study investigates when, why and how he dissented in controversial cases, which are defined as cases that resulted in non-unanimous votes. The study shows that a quantitative study on dissenting opinions of a minority judge alone did not provide comprehensive conclusions. The complementary qualitative discourse analysis shows that in cases that challenged state actions that impacted his social group, Joubran employed distinct strategies and reasoning that are akin to feminist judgments approach. Hence, the study adds to existing research on judicial diversity indicating that women and ethnic minorities judges not only share common challenges but might also operate similar reasoning strategies. In light of these insights, the study calls for employing the combined qualitative and quantitative methodology on examining judgments focusing on dissenting opinions of women and ethnic minority judges as it offers a complex understanding of substantive representation and provides answers regarding the socio-legal effects of group affiliation on judgments.
{"title":"Diversity, Dissent and Representation: Lessons From The First Minority Judge in the Israeli Supreme Court","authors":"Manal Totry-Jubran","doi":"10.1177/09646639211043801","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211043801","url":null,"abstract":"This paper seeks to enrich existing empirical research on substantive representation in the judicial system by exploring a case study of the Honorable Justice (retired) Salim Joubran, the first ethnic-minority judge appointed to the Supreme Court of Israel. By employing a dual methodology of qualitative discourse analysis and dissenting quantitative studies, the study investigates when, why and how he dissented in controversial cases, which are defined as cases that resulted in non-unanimous votes. The study shows that a quantitative study on dissenting opinions of a minority judge alone did not provide comprehensive conclusions. The complementary qualitative discourse analysis shows that in cases that challenged state actions that impacted his social group, Joubran employed distinct strategies and reasoning that are akin to feminist judgments approach. Hence, the study adds to existing research on judicial diversity indicating that women and ethnic minorities judges not only share common challenges but might also operate similar reasoning strategies. In light of these insights, the study calls for employing the combined qualitative and quantitative methodology on examining judgments focusing on dissenting opinions of women and ethnic minority judges as it offers a complex understanding of substantive representation and provides answers regarding the socio-legal effects of group affiliation on judgments.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82815184","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-11DOI: 10.1177/09646639211049104
Susan Banki
Annison H (2015) Dangerous Politics. Oxford: OUP. Beckett K (2001) Crime and control in the culture of late modernity. Law and Society Review 35(4): 899–929. Farrall et al. (eds) (2016) Justice and Penal Reform. Abingdon: Routledge. Jacobson J and Hough M (2018) Missed opportunities and new risks: Penal policy in England and Wales in the past twenty-five years. The Political Quarterly 89(2): 177–186. Reiner R (2021) Social Democratic Criminology. Abingdon: Routledge. Young J (1975) Working class criminology. In: Taylor I, Walton P and Young J (eds) Critical Criminology. London: Routledge, pp. 58–90.
{"title":"Book Review: Refuge Beyond Reach: How Rich Democracies Repel Asylum Seekers","authors":"Susan Banki","doi":"10.1177/09646639211049104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211049104","url":null,"abstract":"Annison H (2015) Dangerous Politics. Oxford: OUP. Beckett K (2001) Crime and control in the culture of late modernity. Law and Society Review 35(4): 899–929. Farrall et al. (eds) (2016) Justice and Penal Reform. Abingdon: Routledge. Jacobson J and Hough M (2018) Missed opportunities and new risks: Penal policy in England and Wales in the past twenty-five years. The Political Quarterly 89(2): 177–186. Reiner R (2021) Social Democratic Criminology. Abingdon: Routledge. Young J (1975) Working class criminology. In: Taylor I, Walton P and Young J (eds) Critical Criminology. London: Routledge, pp. 58–90.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76977456","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-06DOI: 10.1177/09646639211044294
Z. Naqvi
In this paper, I interrogate the English case law on citizenship deprivation and its effects on the migrant and diasporic communities most affected by it from a critical postcolonial perspective. I explore how it forms part of state responses to national security that are rooted in racist imperialist ideologies. These underpinnings are ignored in law because such responses are supposedly reserved for exceptional circumstances. This has led to a lack of critical awareness of the wider damage they cause. The damage caused is compounded by the ways that citizenship deprivation constitutes a technology of the politics of belonging. It orientalises people, “othering” and dividing them into those who belong and those who do not based on their differences. This approach leaves racialised and minoritised citizens more vulnerable to losing their citizenship which is a deliberate form of control reminiscent of the longstanding behaviour of colonialist imperialists.
{"title":"Coloniality, Belonging and Citizenship Deprivation in the UK: Exploring Judicial Responses","authors":"Z. Naqvi","doi":"10.1177/09646639211044294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211044294","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I interrogate the English case law on citizenship deprivation and its effects on the migrant and diasporic communities most affected by it from a critical postcolonial perspective. I explore how it forms part of state responses to national security that are rooted in racist imperialist ideologies. These underpinnings are ignored in law because such responses are supposedly reserved for exceptional circumstances. This has led to a lack of critical awareness of the wider damage they cause. The damage caused is compounded by the ways that citizenship deprivation constitutes a technology of the politics of belonging. It orientalises people, “othering” and dividing them into those who belong and those who do not based on their differences. This approach leaves racialised and minoritised citizens more vulnerable to losing their citizenship which is a deliberate form of control reminiscent of the longstanding behaviour of colonialist imperialists.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73026928","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1177/0964663921992106
Mairead Enright
management and the modernization of criminal justice. Criminology and Criminal Justice 1(3): 301–318. Nelken D (ed) (1997) Comparing Legal Cultures. Aldershot: Dartmouth. Nelken D (ed) (2000) Contrasting Criminal Justice: Getting From Here to There. Advances in Criminology. Aldershot: Ashgate. Nelken D (2004) Using the concept of legal culture. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy 29: 1–26. Raine JW and Willson MJ (1997) Beyond managerialism in criminal justice. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice 36(1): 80–95. Salas D (2005) La Volonté de Punir. Essai Sur Le Populisme Pénal. Paris: Hachette Littérature. Vigour C (2006) Justice: L’introduction d’une rationalité managériale comme euphémisation des enjeux politiques. Droit et Sociéte 63–64(2): 425–455.
刑事司法管理与现代化。犯罪学与刑事司法1(3):301-318。(主编)(1997)比较法律文化。经历:达特茅斯。(2000)刑事司法的对比:从这里到那里。犯罪学进展。经历:Ashgate。Nelken D(2004)运用法律文化的概念。法律哲学学报29(1):1-26。Raine JW和wilson MJ(1997)超越管理主义在刑事司法中的作用。[j] .刑事司法学报，36(1):80-95。Salas D .(2005)。Essai Sur Le Populisme passaal。巴黎:阿歇特?(2006)正义:L 'introduction d 'une rationalit managyriale comme euphacmisation des enjeux politiques。人权与社会通讯63-64(2):425-455。
{"title":"SHARON COWAN, CHLOË KENNEDY and VANESSA MUNRO (eds), Scottish Feminist Judgments: (Re)Creating Law From the Outside In.","authors":"Mairead Enright","doi":"10.1177/0964663921992106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663921992106","url":null,"abstract":"management and the modernization of criminal justice. Criminology and Criminal Justice 1(3): 301–318. Nelken D (ed) (1997) Comparing Legal Cultures. Aldershot: Dartmouth. Nelken D (ed) (2000) Contrasting Criminal Justice: Getting From Here to There. Advances in Criminology. Aldershot: Ashgate. Nelken D (2004) Using the concept of legal culture. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy 29: 1–26. Raine JW and Willson MJ (1997) Beyond managerialism in criminal justice. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice 36(1): 80–95. Salas D (2005) La Volonté de Punir. Essai Sur Le Populisme Pénal. Paris: Hachette Littérature. Vigour C (2006) Justice: L’introduction d’une rationalité managériale comme euphémisation des enjeux politiques. Droit et Sociéte 63–64(2): 425–455.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76697587","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.1177/09646639211033709
Yannick van den Brink
The disproportionate use of remand detention (i.e. pre-trial detention) for vulnerable and marginalized youth is an issue of concern globally and demographic disparities in youth remand decision outcomes have been found in many jurisdictions, including England and the Netherlands. This article aims to explore and identify potential catalysts of disparity in the collective process of remand decision-making in youth courts. Drawing from Ulmer’s ‘inhabited institutions’ perspective, and the related ‘court community model’ and ‘focal concerns model’, and empirical findings from research in Dutch and English youth remand courts, this article suggests that several distinctive mechanisms and features of the youth remand decision-making process might function as catalysts of disparity. The findings indicate that the focus on ‘risk’ and ‘welfare needs’, the distinctive context defined by time constraints, limited information, shortages of readily available services, interdependency and interdisciplinary, and high stakes, combined with the profoundly human nature of courtroom workgroup decision-making, make the remand decision-making process in youth courts particularly prone to producing unwarranted disparities. Ultimately, informed by the theoretical perspectives and empirical findings, the article provides insights into how and why disparities might occur in youth remand decisions and offers suggestions for policy, practice and future research.
{"title":"Different but equal? Exploring potential catalysts of disparity in remand decision-making in the youth court","authors":"Yannick van den Brink","doi":"10.1177/09646639211033709","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211033709","url":null,"abstract":"The disproportionate use of remand detention (i.e. pre-trial detention) for vulnerable and marginalized youth is an issue of concern globally and demographic disparities in youth remand decision outcomes have been found in many jurisdictions, including England and the Netherlands. This article aims to explore and identify potential catalysts of disparity in the collective process of remand decision-making in youth courts. Drawing from Ulmer’s ‘inhabited institutions’ perspective, and the related ‘court community model’ and ‘focal concerns model’, and empirical findings from research in Dutch and English youth remand courts, this article suggests that several distinctive mechanisms and features of the youth remand decision-making process might function as catalysts of disparity. The findings indicate that the focus on ‘risk’ and ‘welfare needs’, the distinctive context defined by time constraints, limited information, shortages of readily available services, interdependency and interdisciplinary, and high stakes, combined with the profoundly human nature of courtroom workgroup decision-making, make the remand decision-making process in youth courts particularly prone to producing unwarranted disparities. Ultimately, informed by the theoretical perspectives and empirical findings, the article provides insights into how and why disparities might occur in youth remand decisions and offers suggestions for policy, practice and future research.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78625278","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-03DOI: 10.1177/09646639211032337
C. Barnard, Sarah Fraser Butlin, Fiona Costello
Following Brexit, European Union citizens now find their rights to live and work in the UK have changed and they had to make an application under the European Union Settlement Scheme, established under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement, by 30 June 2021 to enable them to continue to live in the UK lawfully. This article examines the experience and perceptions of those navigating the European Union Settlement Scheme and how they feel about life in the UK post-Brexit. It raises questions about identity and belonging. We also examine the other routes European Union nationals, and their family members, are choosing to use to secure their status in the UK. Our research highlights how the impacts of Brexit and European Union Settlement Scheme are unevenly felt and experienced by different European Union national groups. The article concludes that it is likely that we will only be able to measure the true extent of the ‘success’ of the European Union Settlement Scheme after the application gateway has closed on 30 June 2021, by learning what happens to those who fall between the gap, especially those more vulnerable.
{"title":"The changing status of European Union nationals in the United Kingdom following Brexit: The lived experience of the European Union Settlement Scheme","authors":"C. Barnard, Sarah Fraser Butlin, Fiona Costello","doi":"10.1177/09646639211032337","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211032337","url":null,"abstract":"Following Brexit, European Union citizens now find their rights to live and work in the UK have changed and they had to make an application under the European Union Settlement Scheme, established under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement, by 30 June 2021 to enable them to continue to live in the UK lawfully. This article examines the experience and perceptions of those navigating the European Union Settlement Scheme and how they feel about life in the UK post-Brexit. It raises questions about identity and belonging. We also examine the other routes European Union nationals, and their family members, are choosing to use to secure their status in the UK. Our research highlights how the impacts of Brexit and European Union Settlement Scheme are unevenly felt and experienced by different European Union national groups. The article concludes that it is likely that we will only be able to measure the true extent of the ‘success’ of the European Union Settlement Scheme after the application gateway has closed on 30 June 2021, by learning what happens to those who fall between the gap, especially those more vulnerable.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75762692","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-02DOI: 10.1177/09646639211032317
E. Millar
Gestational limits on abortion are often seen as a condition for decriminalisation. Focusing on the final reports of three institutional law reform inquiries into abortion in Australia, this article argues that gestational limits were recommended through foreclosing the subject position of the unwillingly pregnant woman who experiences gestational time as a threat to her bodily integrity and imagined future. Structural features of law reform commissions tethered models of decriminalisation to the era of criminalisation. Abortion was also rendered meaningful in the reports through discursive tropes that centred foetal viability and constructed later abortion in terms of a delay that required explanation, with the medico-judicial categories used to explain this delay – which distinguished between ‘medical’ and ‘psychosocial’ abortions – recentring the decision-making authority of doctors. Gestational limits on abortion rearticulate the exceptionality of abortion, reinscribing the illegitimacy of abortion and the people who have them, at least at later stages of pregnancy.
{"title":"Maintaining exceptionality: Interrogating gestational limits for abortion","authors":"E. Millar","doi":"10.1177/09646639211032317","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639211032317","url":null,"abstract":"Gestational limits on abortion are often seen as a condition for decriminalisation. Focusing on the final reports of three institutional law reform inquiries into abortion in Australia, this article argues that gestational limits were recommended through foreclosing the subject position of the unwillingly pregnant woman who experiences gestational time as a threat to her bodily integrity and imagined future. Structural features of law reform commissions tethered models of decriminalisation to the era of criminalisation. Abortion was also rendered meaningful in the reports through discursive tropes that centred foetal viability and constructed later abortion in terms of a delay that required explanation, with the medico-judicial categories used to explain this delay – which distinguished between ‘medical’ and ‘psychosocial’ abortions – recentring the decision-making authority of doctors. Gestational limits on abortion rearticulate the exceptionality of abortion, reinscribing the illegitimacy of abortion and the people who have them, at least at later stages of pregnancy.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76152259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：