Abstract
Introduction
Abortion is a health practice that people might choose for a variety of reasons. In public discourse, a subtle hierarchy of legitimacy frequently emerges in relation to abortion’ motivations, thereby establishing an implicit distinction between abortions deemed acceptable or justifiable and those considered unacceptable or unjustifiable.
Methods
We conducted an experimental study to examine the impact of different motivations commonly perceived as “good and acceptable” (i.e., health risks or rape) and “bad and unacceptable” (i.e., lack of desire to have a child or incompatibility between women’s lives and their careers) on the stigmatization of women who choose to abort (i.e., moral outrage and attribution of humanness) and the perceived severity of hostile behaviors against them.
Results
Findings show that participants experienced more moral outrage towards the woman when she chose to abort for “bad and unacceptable” reasons (vs. “good and acceptable”), attributed her less humanness, and perceived hostile behaviors toward her as less severe. In addition, we found that “bad and unacceptable” reasons influenced participants’ perceptions of hostile behaviors through the mediation of moral outrage and the attribution of humanness to her.
Conclusions and Policy Implications
Highlighting motivations for abortion reinforces not only the divide between “good” and “bad” abortions but also between “good” and “bad” women. The key conclusions, limitations, and directions for the future are explored in the context of combating abortion stigma and backlash, ultimately advocating for reproductive justice.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author.
Notes
Research findings did not change with the inclusion of religious affiliation, political orientation, and indirect experience of abortion as covariates together with the gender of participants and the positive attitudes towards abortion.
References
Abrams, P. (2015). The bad mother: Stigma, abortion and surrogacy. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 43(2), 179–191.
APA Task Force on Mental Health and Abortion. (2008). Report of the APA Task Force on Mental Health and Abortion. Author.
Ashburn-Nardo, L. (2017). Parenthood as a moral imperative? Moral outrage and the stigmatization of voluntarily childfree women and men. Sex Roles, 76(5–6), 393–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0606-1
Bahr, S. J., & Marcos, A. C. (2003). Cross-cultural attitudes toward abortion: Greeks versus Americans. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 402–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X02250892
Baird, B., & Millar, E. (2019). More than stigma: Interrogating counter narratives of abortion. Sexualities, 22(7–8), 1110–1126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460718782966
Bastian, B., & Haslam, N. (2010). Excluded from humanity: The dehumanizing effects of social ostracism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.06.022
Bastian, B., Denson, T. F., & Haslam, N. (2013). The roles of dehumanization and moral outrage in retributive justice. PLoS ONE, 8(4), e61842. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061842
Bays, A. (2017). Perceptions, emotions, and behaviors toward women based on parental status. Sex Roles, 76(3–4), 138–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0655-5
Beynon-Jones, S. M. (2017). Untroubling abortion: A discourse analysis of women’s accounts. Feminism & Psychology, 27(2), 225–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353517696515
Biggs, M. A., Gould, H., & Foster, D. G. (2013). Understanding why women seek abortions in the US. BMC Women’s Health, 13, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-13-29
Biggs, M. A., Brown, K., & Foster, D. G. (2020). Perceived abortion stigma and psychological well-being over five years after receiving or being denied an abortion. PLoS One, 15(1), e0226417. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226417
Camilli, A. (2023). Perché in Italia i medici obiettori sono così tanti [In Italy, why are there so many conscientious objector doctors?]. Retrieved October 12, 2023, from https://www.internazionale.it/essenziale/notizie/annalisa-camilli/2023/02/01/aborto-obiezione-di-coscienza-italia
Caruso, E. (2020). Abortion in Italy: Forty years on. Feminist Legal Studies, 28(1), 87–96.
Chae, S., Desai, S., Crowell, M., & Sedgh, G. (2017). Reasons why women have induced abortions: A synthesis of findings from 14 countries. Contraception, 96, 233–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2017.06.014
Charrier, L., Bo, M., Koumantakis, E., & Zotti, C. M. (2022). The impact of conscientious objection on voluntary abortion in Italy in the last two decades. European Journal of Public Health, 32(Supplement_3), ckac129–670. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac129.670
Chiweshe, M., Mavuso, J., & Macleod, C. (2017). Reproductive justice in context: South African and Zimbabwean women’s narratives of their abortion decision. Feminism & Psychology, 27(2), 203–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353517699234
Chrisler, J. C., Gorman, J. A., Marván, M. L., & Johnston-Robledo, I. (2014). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward women in different stages of reproductive life: A semantic, cross-cultural approach. Health Care for Women International, 35(6), 634–657.
Clarke, E. V., Sibley, C. G., & Osborne, D. (2023). Examining changes in abortion attitudes following the transition to parenthood. Sex Roles, 1–12.
Cockrill, K., & Hessini, L. (2014). Introduction: Bringing abortion stigma into focus. Women & Health, 54, 593–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/03630242.2014.947218
Cockrill, K., & Nack, A. (2013). “I’m not that type of person”: Managing the stigma of having an abortion. Deviant Behavior, 34(12), 973–990. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2013.800423
Crocker, J., Major, B., & Steele, C. (1998). Social stigma. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 504–553). Academic Press.
Dennihy, M. (2021). Our abortions, are our business — No explanation required. Retrieved April 19, 2023, from https://msmagazine.com/2021/09/13/why-do-people-get-abortions/
Dyer, R. L., Checkalski, O. R., & Gervais, S. J. (2023). Abortion decisions as humanizing acts: The application of ambivalent sexism and objectification to women-centered anti-abortion rhetoric. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 03616843231173673.
Erdman, J. N., & Cook, R. J. (2020). Decriminalization of abortion–A human rights imperative. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 62, 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2019.05.004
Esposito, C. L., & Basow, S. A. (1995). College students’ attitudes toward abortion: The role of knowledge and demographic variables. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1996–2017. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995.tb01828.x
EVS/WVS. (2021). European Values Study and World Values Survey: Joint EVS/WVS 2017–2021 Dataset (Joint EVS/WVS). JD Systems Institute & WVSA. Dataset Version 1.1.0. https://doi.org/10.14281/18241.11
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
Furedi, A. (2021). The moral case for abortion: A defence of reproductive choice. Springer Nature.
Giovannelli, I., Mannarini, T., Spaccatini, F., & Pacilli, M. G. (2023). Fighting for abortion rights: Strategies aimed at managing stigma in a group of Italian pro-choice activists. Feminism & Psychology, 33(1), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593535221106653
Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Prentice-Hall.
Jones, A., Huslage, M., & Dalton, M. (2022). “Any reason is valid:” How an unexpected abortion disclosure is received by an online community. Social Work in Public Health, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/19371918.2022.2096736
Hafferty, F. W., & O'Donnell, J. F. (2015). The Hidden Curriculum in Health Professional Education. Dartmouth College Press.
Haslam, N. (2022). Dehumanization and the lack of social connection. Current Opinion in Psychology, 43, 312–316.
Haslam, N., & Loughnan, S. (2014). Dehumanization and infrahumanization. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 399–423. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115045
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Hill, A. (2004). The relationship between attitudes about abortion and cognitive complexity. Journal of Undergraduate Research, VII. Retrieved April 10, 2023, from https://www.uwlax.edu/URC/JUR-online/
Hodson, G., & MacInnis, C. C. (2017). Can left-right differences in abortion support be explained by sexism? Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 118–121.
Hoggart, L. (2017). Internalised abortion stigma: Young women’s strategies of resistance and rejection. Feminism & Psychology, 27(2), 186–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353517698997
Huang, Y., Osborne, D., Sibley, C. G., & Davies, P. G. (2014). The precious vessel: Ambivalent sexism and opposition to elective and traumatic abortion. Sex Roles, 71(11–12), 436–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-0423-3
Huang, Y., Davies, P. G., Sibley, C. G., & Osborne, D. (2016). Benevolent sexism, attitudes toward motherhood, and reproductive rights: A multi-study longitudinal examination of abortion attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 970–984. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216649607
Kirkman, M., Rowe, H., Hardiman, A., Mallett, S., & Rosenthal, D. (2009). Reasons women give for abortion: A review of the literature. Archives of Women’s Mental Health, 12, 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-009-0084-3
Kteily, N., Bruneau, E., Waytz, A., & Cotterill, S. (2015). The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(5), 901–931. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000048
Kumar, A., Hessini, L., & Mitchell, E. M. (2009). Conceptualising abortion stigma. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 11(6), 625–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691050902842741
Jelen, T. G., Damore, D. F., & Lamatsch, T. (2002). Gender, employment status, and abortion: A longitudinal analysis. Sex Roles, 47, 321–330. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021427014047
Jozkowski, K. N., Crawford, B. L., & Hunt, M. E. (2018). Complexity in attitudes toward abortion access: Results from two studies. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 15, 464–482.
Lalli, C. (2017). Aborto: Un peccato perdonabile? [Abortion: A forgivable sin?]. Medicina Nei Secoli, 28(1), 7–18.
Lalli, C., & Montegiove, S. (2022). Mai dati. Dati aperti (sulla 194). Perché sono nostri e perché ci servono per scegliere [Open data (on Law. n. 194). Why they are ours and why we need them to choose]. Fandango Libri.
Major, B., Appelbaum, M., Beckman, L., Dutton, M. A., Russo, N. F., & West, C. (2009). Abortion and mental health: Evaluating the evidence. The American Psychologist, 64, 863–890. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017497
Major, B., & Gramzow, R. H. (1999). Abortion as stigma: Cognitive and emotional implications of concealment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 735–745. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.4.735
McKinney, C. (2019). A good abortion is a tragic abortion: Fit motherhood and disability stigma. Hypatia, 34(2), 266–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12461
Mikołajczak, S., & Bilewicz, M. (2015). Foetus or child? Abortion discourse and attributions of humanness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 500–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12096
Mollen, D. (2006). Voluntarily childfree women: Experiences and counselling considerations. Journal of Mental Health Counselling, 28, 269–284. https://doi.org/10.17744/mehc.28.3.39w5h93mreb0mk4f
Morison, T. (2021). Reproductive justice: A radical framework for researching sexual and reproductive issues in psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(6), e12605.
Nash, E. (2022). Focusing on exceptions misses the true harm of abortion bans. Retrieved April 18, 2023, from https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2022/12/focusing-exceptions-misses-true-harm-abortion-bans
Nash, E., & Naide, S. (2021). State policy trends at midyear 2021: Already the worst legislative year ever for U.S. abortion rights. Retrieved April 18, 2023, from https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2021/07/state-policytrends-midyear-2021-already-worst-legislative-year-ever-us-abortion
Norris, A., Bessett, D., Steinberg, J. R., Kavanaugh, M. L., De Zordo, S., & Becker, D. (2011). Abortion stigma: A reconceptualization of constituents, causes, and consequences. Women’s Health Issues, 21(3), S49–S54.
Osborne, D., & Davies, P. G. (2009). Social dominance orientation, ambivalent sexism, and abortion: Explaining pro-choice and pro-life attitudes. In L. B. Palcroft & M. V. Lopez (Eds.), Personality assessment: New research (pp. 309–320). New York, NY: Nova Science.
Osborne, D., & Davies, P. G. (2012). When benevolence backfires: Benevolent sexists’ opposition to elective and traumatic abortion. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00890.x
Osborne, D., Huang, Y., Overall, N. C., Sutton, R. M., Petterson, A., Douglas, K. M., ... & Sibley, C. G. (2022). Abortion attitudes: An overview of demographic and ideological differences. Political Psychology, 43, 29–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12803
Pacilli, M. G., Giovannelli, I., Spaccatini, F., Vaes, J., & Barbaranelli, C. (2018). Elective abortion predicts the dehumanization of women and men through the mediation of moral outrage. Social Psychology, 49, 287–302. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000351
Pagano, S. J., & Huo, Y. J. (2007). The role of moral emotions in predicting support for political actions in post-war Iraq. Political Psychology, 28, 227–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00563.x
Pagliaro, S., Cavazza, N., Paolini, D., Teresi, M., Johnson, J. D., & Pacilli, M. G. (2022). Adding insult to injury: The effects of intimate partner violence spillover on the victim’s reputation. Violence against Women, 28(6–7), 1523–1541. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012211014566
Petterson, A., & Sutton, R. M. (2018). Sexist ideology and endorsement of men’s control over women’s decisions in reproductive health. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42(2), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684317744531
Pioggia, A. (2016). The devil in the details: Women’s right to abortion and health organization. Medicina Nei Secoli, 28(1), 149–172.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Prusaczyk, E., & Hodson, G. (2019). Re-examining left-right differences in abortion opposition: The roles of sexism and shared reality. TPM-Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 26(3), 431–445.
Reinstein, D., & Riener, G. (2012). Reputation and influence in charitable giving: An experiment. Theory and Decision, 72, 221–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-011-9245-8
Ross, L., & Solinger, R. (2017). Reproductive justice: An introduction. University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999949.2017.1389634
Ross, L. J. (2017). Reproductive justice as intersectional feminist activism. Souls, 19(3), 286–314.
Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 629–645. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.629
Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (1999). Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle managers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(5), 1004–1010. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.1004
Rudman, L. A., & Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 157–176. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.157
Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Glick, P., & Phelan, J. E. (2012). Reactions to vanguards: Advances in backlash theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 167–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394286-9.00004-4
Schoemann, A. M., Boulton, A. J., & Short, S. D. (2017). Determining power and sample size for simple and complex mediation models. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 379–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506177150
Semmann, D., Krambeck, H. J., & Milinski, M. (2005). Reputation is valuable within and outside one’s own social group. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 57, 611–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-004-0885-3
Skitka, L. J., Wisneski, D. C., & Brandt, M. J. (2018). Attitude moralization: Probably not intuitive or rooted in perceptions of harm. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(1), 9–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417727861
Smith, B. E. Y., Bartz, D., Goldberg, A. B., & Janiak, E. (2018). “Without any indication”: Stigma and a hidden curriculum within medical students’ discussion of elective abortion. Social Science & Medicine, 214, 26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.07.014
Sorhaindo, A. M., Juárez-Ramírez, C., Olavarrieta, C. D., Aldaz, E., Mejia Pineros, M. C., & Garcia, S. (2014). Qualitative evidence on abortion stigma from Mexico City and five states in Mexico. Women & Health, 54(7), 622–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/03630242.2014.919983
Starrs, A. M., Ezeh, A. C., Barker, G., Basu, A., Bertrand, J. T., Blum, R., ... & Ashford, L. S. (2018). Accelerate progress—Sexual and reproductive health and rights for all: Report of the Guttmacher-Lancet Commission. The lancet, 391(10140), 2642–2692.
Sutton, R. M., Murphy, A. O., Petterson, A., & Douglas, K. M. (2022). The politics of abortion, pregnancy, and motherhood. In D. Osborne & C. Sibley (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of political psychology (pp. 272–283). Cambridge University Press.
Tian, Q., Pacilli, M. G., & Giovannelli, I. (2023). Dehumanization of women and men in elective abortion: A preregistered replication in China. Asian Journal of Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12567
Turnbull, B., Graham, M. L., & Taket, A. R. (2016). Social exclusion of Australian childless women in their reproductive years. Social inclusion, 4(1), 102–115. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v4i1.489
Uskul, A. K., Cross, S. E., Günsoy, C., & Gul, P. (2019). Cultures of honor. In D. Cohen & S. Kitayama (Eds.), Handbook of Cultural Psychology (pp. 793–821). The Guilford Press.
Uskul, A. K., & Cross, S. E. (2020). Socio-ecological roots of cultures of honor. Current Opinion in Psychology, 32, 177–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.11.001
Wang, G., & Buffalo, M. D. (2004). Social and cultural determinants of attitudes toward abortion: A test of Reiss’ hypotheses. Social Science Journal, 41, 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2003.10.008
Watson, K. (2018). Why we should stop using the term “elective abortion.” AMA Journal of Ethics, 20(12), 1175–1180.
Weidner, G., & Griffitt, W. (1984). Abortion as a stigma: In the eyes of the beholder. Journal of Research in Personality, 18, 359–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(84)90020-5
Weitz, T. A. (2010). Rethinking the mantra that abortion should be" safe, legal, and rare". Journal of Women’s History, 22(3), 161–172. https://doi.org/10.1353/jowh.2010.0595
World Health Organization. (2021). Abortion. Retrieved April 10, 2023, from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/abortion
Wu, T., Su, Y., Shi, X., & Zheng, Y. (2023). The association between gender role norms and abortion stigma among Chinese heterosexual adults in romantic relationships: The effect of ambivalent sexism, motherhood traditionalism, and the sexual double standard. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-023-00823-1
Funding
Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme, 881918, Dr. Carme Garia-Yeste.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The first and last authors conceived and designed the study. The first, second, and last authors collected the data. All the authors had a significant input in the data analysis and wrote the paper. All authors revised and approved the final version of the paper.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics Approval
The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of both the Declaration of Helsinki (1964) and the Italian Association of Psychology (AIP).
Consent to Participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Consent for Publication
Not applicable: Our manuscript does not contain any individual person’s data in any form (including any individual details, images, or videos).
Competing Interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Pacilli, M.G., Spaccatini, F., Pagliaro, S. et al. From “Bad” and “Good” Motivations to Abort to “Bad” and “Good” Women: Abortion Stigma and Backlash Against Women Who Interrupt Their Pregnancy. Sex Res Soc Policy (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-023-00927-8
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-023-00927-8