Gross_Autumn: 84221218; Orozco-Garcia_Erica: 64584126; Becerra_Alessio: 80055959; Cantu_Isabella: 63145374; Sanchez, Denice (84751703) 

1. Ireland’s abortion struggle centered on whether women had the right to make decisions about their own pregnancies. For much of the 20th century, abortion was completely banned under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act and later reinforced by the Eighth Amendment (1983), which granted equal right to life of the mother and the “unborn.” This meant women had no legal right to abortion in nearly all cases, even in situations of rape, incest, or fatal fetal abnormalities. Reproductive rights were therefore extremely limited, and access often meant traveling abroad or seeking unsafe alternatives.

2. The injustice issues in this case center on the lack of access to an abortion and the inequality in which communities had the means to transport themselves to other countries to get access to abortions.

3. Ireland’s politics have historically been strongly influenced by religious beliefs, particularly Catholicism, which shaped laws and policies around reproduction. This religious influence led to strict anti-abortion laws and a political environment where reproductive rights were limited for decades. The Catholic Church's moral authority also extended into Irish culture, reinforcing traditional views on gender, sexuality, and motherhood.

4. Older versions of the amendment barred access to abortion services in Ireland, but allowed women to travel out of the country for services. Newer versions of the amendment allowed women whose lives or health were endangered to receive abortions, but only in more extreme cases.

Schubert Karsten, Howarth Jillian, Calderon Sebastian, Jeetadali Jaritzi Vargas Salcido

• This case involves a woman's right to have children and to marry. Married couples were restricted to only having one child, and this was enforced via forced sterilization, coerced abortions, and birth permits provided by the government. In 2016, the policy was revised to a 2-child and then a 3-child limit, as the population was declining.

• The justice issues here are a social stigma around the gender of children, especially when males are more preferred than females. To continue, coercion into having just one child, along with later marriages to prevent population growth, occurred to achieve the goal of a 1% population growth rate.

• Politics heavily shaped this issue as the government pushed very hard to decrease population growth rates to ensure that China could support its own population. A community's fertility behavior could be influenced by incomes and allocations of funds, and it was encouraged to pressure those who sought to have more children.

• This law has strongly limited reproductive rights by forcing citizens to limit how many children they can have, and even worse, has created a social stigma around the gender of children, leading many to disregard the lives of female children and prioritize males more. However, it does exist to reward those who follow it by providing families who follow the law with child and maternal services and access to specific government-mandated healthcare.

What are reproductive rights in this case?

• Right to life and health

  • Women here have the right to survive pregnancy and childbirth. They will also be free from preventable maternal deaths. 

• Right to access quality maternal healthcare

  • Maternal healthcare means that women will have prenatal care and access to a trained healthcare professional. 

• Right to safe abortion

  • In the legal framework of Nigeria abortion is highly restricted, but that is not the case for the legal framework in international human rights. According to international human rights, women should have access to safe abortion services.

• Right to information

  • Women will have the right to accurate, timely health information that they would need to make informed choices when it comes to reproduction. 

What are the justice issues (e.g., access, inequality, coercion, stigma, colonial history)?

• Lack of access to quality maternal healthcare: most Nigerian healthcare facilities are without trained physicians and providers

• Most maternal deaths in Nigeria are from preventable causes, but socioeconomic disparities and inadequate infrastructure result in delays seeking and receiving adequate care

• The Nigerian government’s lack of accountability for failing to address preventable maternal mortalities and provide adequate funding for healthcare

How do politics, history, and culture shape reproductive realities here?

• Colonization encouraged an eurocentric way of learning, placing a need for men in education more than women

• Lack of women in political and military positions, decreasing the ability to have women’s voices and concerns present

  • There have been few women in positions of leadership in the 50s-60s; and until 1999, women’s civil and human rights were fought for alongside democracy

• “Nigeria has the highest estimated maternal death rate, accounting for over one‑quarter (28.3%) of all estimated global maternal deaths” (ncbi)

  • Consistent lack of access to contraception and safe abortion practices increases the maternal mortality rate

• Precolonial Nigeria: women held prominent roles in economic and social activities, but held similar domestic and subordinate positions as US women in regards to social order.

  • However, the public and private were blended spheres, especially due to trading– an economic activity– which granted more social power than a complete separation of the spheres

• Colonial influences brought eurocentric patriarchal structures which reformed Nigerian gender dynamics

  --> This results in a similar circumstance of decreased education on maternal/natal care, education regarding sex and pregnancy, as well as general subordinative perspectives on women

How has the law both supported and limited reproductive rights movements in this case?

• Supported:

  • Federal High Court of Nigeria has affirmed the right to abortion for survivors of sexual violence in June 2025

  • Nigeria is legally obligated under the Maputo Protocol to provide access to safe and legal abortion services when pregnancy endangers a woman’s health

• Limited:

  • Still severe legal restrictions on abortion due to the Criminal Code Act and Penal Code Act, perpetuating unsafe abortion practices that increase maternal mortality rates

• Reproductive rights: In the Fujimori case, these rights were systematically violated. Many Indigenous and rural women were subjected to forced or coerced sterilizations without informed consent. Instead of giving them a choice, the state restricted autonomy by treating sterilization as a “population control” measure rather than a choice/right.

• There are many issues in this case, especially the injustice faced by the victims who were forcibly sterilized. It violated reproductive rights and targeted vulnerable populations which is selective targeting making it an issue of structural inequality and justice. The campaign also framed women as a problem for national development, reinforcing patriarchal control over women reproduction.

• Politics, history, and culture that shape the reproductive reality: Women were rapidly reproducing due to their societal roles. Large families by 1970 were thought to be a threat to democratic stability, and thus feminists, the political left, and the Catholic Church supported birth control (however, voluntary sterilization and abortion were not legalized). Realization of resource shortage induced sterilization movements and forced sterilization.

• Laws were used both to justify and to oppose Fujimori’s sterilization campaigns: The government legalized and promoted sterilization as a “progressive” family planning policy, which allowed for legal cover for mass coercive procedures that mostly targeted poor and Indigenous women, often without their consent. At the same time, human rights organizations would later turn to international and national laws. However, accountability was often limited by legal restrictions and delays, suggesting that the law both enabled abuses of state power while providing activists with tools to resist those abuses.

Questions:

1.) In Australia's Stolen Generations, reproductive rights for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women were denied and systemically violated. This period is marked by policies of forced child removal, sterilization, medical neglect, marriage restrictions, and cultural erasure, all of which had devastating impacts of body autonomy and family life.

2.) The justice issues of this policy was that Indigenous families were denied equality to family life & parental rights in comparison to white Australians. Indigenous children were ripped away from their families & some women were forced to be sterilized or put into birth control. Colonial racism was also endorsed as it emphasized indigenous individuals as inferior to whites & their parenting was scrutinized as incapable.

3.) The way that politics, history, and culture shape reproductive realities in Australia in regards to the 1910 to the 1970s stolen generation is via the following ways, government assimilation policies gave the state power to remove Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families. These policies were rooted in colonial history that viewed Indigenous cultures as inferior and sought to “breed out” Aboriginal identity. By ignoring Indigenous kinship systems and imposing white, nuclear family norms, the state denied Indigenous people the cultural and reproductive right to raise their children. Politics, history, and culture therefore worked together to undermine family continuity and Indigenous autonomy.

4.) In 1995, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission initiated the forced separation of indigenous children from their families. In the 1960s and 1970s, discriminatory policies included forced sterilization and contraception. These policies were forced without consent because of the fear that the indigenous population would grow.

• What are the reproductive rights in this case?

  • Lack of access to care (bombed medical facilities), 

  • Lack access to contraception and menstrual products, leading to unsafe reproductive procedures

  • Malnutrition and dehydration leads to higher maternal deaths

  • Rising miscarriages, stillbirths, and premature births due to stress from violence

• What are the justice issues (e.g., access, inequality, coercion, stigma, colonial history)?

  • Lack of access to care and supplies, active violence

  • The basic human rights are seen more politically than human concerns

• How do politics, history, and culture shape reproductive realities here?

  • The political issues are tied to the goals of eradicating the Palestinian population

  • Liberation from occupation and patriarchy

  • Contraception is already heavily restricted by the culture

• How has the law both supported and limited reproductive rights movements in this case?

  • Restricting resources for women and inciting reproductive violence towards children, babies, and infants is considered an act of genocide as stated under Article 6 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which encompasses actions such as "imposing measures intended to prevent births within a group”.”

By Isabella Blake, Rachael Seohyun Lee, Jesper Kwon, Thai Tran, & Rachael Ranney

(Okereke, E. Trista, Rosewood S. Altas, Ahadi Shaden, Kallie Grace Brianna, Nalik Nitya)

Nitya Naik- Inequality, oppression, stigma, and the effects of colonial rule were some of the biggest challenges during apartheid. Black women were forced to turn to underfunded clinics with high rates of mother and infant death, whereas white women had access to private doctors and modern hospitals. Black women were often forced into using birth control or getting sterilized by state-funded family planning programs, which was reducing overpopulation according to the government. Poor Black women were especially at risk of unsafe treatments since abortions were illegal at the time. These laws reinforced colonialism's views of Black people being workers whose reproduction could be managed for the benefit of the state. 

"The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act (1949) and the Immorality Amendment Act (1950) prohibited interracial marriage or sex." (Britannica) "The ban on interracial sex was lifted in 1985, but certain sections of the 1957 act dealing with prostitution remain in force as the "Sexual Offences Act, 1957"." (wikipedia)

Trista Okereke-The apartheid state in South Africa institutionalized racially differentiated reproductive policies that reflected colonial ideologies and reinforced white nationalist control. Black women were disproportionately targeted by state-funded family planning programs, which aggressively promoted long-term contraceptives such as Depo-Provera, IUDs, and sterilization, often without full informed consent (Kaufman, 2000). These interventions were not grounded in health or empowerment, but in the state's political goal of limiting the growth of the Black population, driven by white fears of being demographically “swamped” (Norling, 2021). Mobile clinics were deployed across townships and rural areas, while abortion was criminalized under the 1975 Abortion and Sterilisation Act, except in cases of severe mental or physical risk or rape, effectively reinforcing race- and class-based reproductive control (Klausen, 2015). In contrast, white women had access to private doctors and modern hospitals, ensuring safer reproductive care. Meanwhile, Black women were forced to rely on overcrowded, under-resourced public clinics, especially in rural Bantustans like Transkei and KwaZulu, where maternal and infant mortality rates were significantly higher. A 1983 investigation at a Soweto clinic found that nearly 50% of women received contraceptive injections without proper explanation or the option to refuse (Klausen, 2015). These policies were underpinned by a colonial view of Black people as laborers, whose reproductive capacity could be managed to serve the economic and political needs of the state. Cultural factors such as patriarchal norms and social stigma surrounding abortion further restricted Black women’s reproductive autonomy, compounding the structural violence of apartheid. Ultimately, reproductive health policy in apartheid South Africa operated as a mechanism of racial domination, limiting bodily autonomy, reinforcing systemic inequality, and reflecting the deep entanglement of politics, history, and culture in shaping reproductive realities.

Sources:

Kaufman, C. E. (2000). Reproductive control in South Africa. Studies in Family Planning, 31(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4465.2000.00001.x
Klausen, S. M. (2015). Abortion under apartheid: Nationalism, sexuality, and women's reproductive rights in South Africa. Oxford University Press.

Norling, L. (2021). Family planning and fertility in South Africa under apartheid. African Economic History Network. Retrieved from https://www.aehnetwork.org/blog/family-planning-and-fertility-in-south-africa-under-apartheid

Atlas: The Abortion and Steralization Act of 1975 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/gender-justice/resource/abortion_and_sterilization_act#:~:text=The%20Abortion%20and%20Sterilization%20Act,on%20people%20incapable%20of%20consent.) disallowed for abortion with exceptions for only extreme cases (as a Polish person this draconian type of reproductive control is familiar to me). This law effectively reduce the ability of doctors to procure abortions and was aimed at controlling young white South African women from engaging in sexual activity before marriage. This instituionalized control was a South African ruling population's response to fears of 'moral decay' regarding sexuality that emminated from Western and international reproductive justice movements and struggles. In this way, the law was aimed at limiting reproductive justice progress and was linked to reinforcing South Africa's heteronormative Christian-value-influenced racist apartheid (https://muse.jhu.edu/article/394043/summary#:~:text=This%20article%20examines%20the%20struggle,of%20white%20female%20reproductive%20sexuality.).

Seima_Alianni

Navarro_Melany

Guzman_Kevin

Leong_Julia

Brazil & Argentina Abortion Rights Movements (2010s–2020s)

• What are the reproductive rights in this case?

  • One of the main issues involved is abortion.

• What are the justice issues (e.g., access, inequality, coercion, stigma, colonial history)?

  • One of the justice issues was regarding limited access to abortion, as at the time abortion was only legal under rape, mother/fetus life threatened, or if the fetus has a serious illness/disability that would impact their quality of life.

• How do politics, history, and culture shape reproductive realities here?

  • It was really difficult for women to legalize abortion, as they had to go all the way up to the supreme court. As of 2023, women are still struggling to decriminalize abortion as the president of the time made cuts to family planning. In addition, many of the politicians used religion to justify their criminalization of abortion in most circumstances.

• How has the law both supported and limited reproductive rights movements in this case?

  • In brazil the law has mainly limited reproductive rights movements, most recently in 2024 there was a bill proposed which would give the victim of rape a harsher sentence than the assailant. Meanwhile in Argentina their government has been more progressive and supporting abortion rights, the president in 2019 endorsed abortion rights.

Members:

Wada_Kyson

Lopez_Maritza

Talana_Sherie

Kim_JeanEon

Li_Junyi

• What are the reproductive rights in this case?

  • The reproductive rights in India were established in the years 1975-77, which were violated by the state through force 

  • Fundamental rights were suspended by the government, which involuntarily implemented a massive sterilization program to control the population 

  • People were mainly poor/ men were sterilized, which affected their productive system

  • They were also limited to services such as housing and healthcare

  • Men were threatened with salary cuts or job termination to comply with government regulations.

  • Some women were forced to be sterilized to “save” their husbands from the procedures

• What are the justice issues (e.g., access, inequality, coercion, stigma, colonial history?

  • The Emergency Sterilization campaign of 1975-77 in India was during a time when the prime minister declared a state of emergency. There were issues with coercion and human rights abuses because millions of people were sterilized against their will, which violated autonomy and rights. Furthermore, there was inequality because this hit the poor the hardest. The government often used coercion or incentives to target vulnerable and marginalized populations. (Jean Eon Kim)

• How do politics, history, and culture shape reproductive realities here?

  • The emergency sterilization campaign was shaped by India’s political, historical, and cultural context. 

  • Politically, Indira Gandhi’s suspension of civil liberties and Sanjay Gandhi’s push for population control tied reproductive policy to authoritarian rule. 

  • Historically, India’s early family planning program (1952) expanded under global fears of “overpopulation”, turning into a coercive, quota-driven system during the Emergency. 

  • Culturally, vasectomies were first emphasized for speed and cost, but stigma and backlash shifted the burden to women. 

  • These dynamics show how reproductive realities were molded by state power, development priorities, and gender norms. 

• How has the law both supported and limited reproductive rights movements in this case?

  • In 1976, a widespread sterilization plan was set to reduce population growth in India, and males were forced to undergo vasectomies, limiting their ability to have children. From 1976-1977, 8.3 million individuals had forced sterilizations, which goes against one of the main goals in the reproductive rights movement: the right to have children. Underage to older men were beaten and taken against their will to be sterilized, some having another sterilization procedure, revealing how strict this policy was and how serious law officials were about limiting the population. 

  • Eventually, the 42nd Amendment led the government to stop these forced procedures and give citizens back their reproductive rights to have a family