Selective reduction and abortion both involve the termination of fetal life, but they are classified by different designations to underscore the notion that they are regarded as fundamentally different medical procedures: the two are performed using distinct techniques by different types of physicians, upon women under very different circumstances, in order to further dramatically different objectives. Hence, the two procedures appear to call for a distinct moral calculus, and they have traditionally evoked contradictory reactions from society. This essay posits that (...) despite their different appellations, selective reduction and abortion are essentially equivalent. (shrink)

‘Women-protective’ language is broadly used as a frame in political discussions on women’s reproductive healthcare and labour rights. This article addresses the use of ‘women-protective’ language in online news articles in the Latvian media about the proposed prohibition of oocyte donation for nulliparous women. The main focus of the recent Latvian debate has not been on the technology itself, but rather on the female body and women’s rationality and decision-making capacity. The results of the analysis show that use of the (...) ‘women-protective’ frame positions women as victims, increases control over the female body and restricts women’s rights to make autonomous decisions. The application of this frame is especially dangerous when used by politicians as it may lead to the legal restriction of women’s rights. (shrink)