Editor's Introduction: More Than Two Sides: Abortion in Historical Perspective

• Date: 01 January 2017
• Published date: 01 January 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12175

The AMERICAN JOURNAL of

ECONOMICS and SOCIOLOGY

Published Q U A R T E R L Y in the interest of constructive

synthesis in the social sciences, under grants from the

FRANCIS NEILSON FUND and the ROBERT SCHALKENBACH

FOUNDATION. Founded in 1941

Volume 76 January 2017 Number 1

Editor’s Introduction:

More Than Two Sides: Abortion

in Historical Perspective

Introduction

With the exception of slavery and states’ rights in the middle of the

19

th

century, there has probably been no issue in the history of the

United States as divisive as questions regarding the moral and legal

status of abortion. At least, that is the way the issue has been portrayed

in popular books and articles for the past 30 to 40 years. The attacks in

2016 in the U.S. Congress on funding for Planned Parenthood are just

the most recent battle in an ongoing war, sometimes fought with

words, sometimes with laws, and sometimes with violence. But does

that war truly reflect the beliefs of Americans, or is the situation con-

tinually framed as a deep conflict for partisan or ideological reasons?

Not as Divided as We Seem

As with many other issues, the news media have a tendency to frame

issues in terms of a simple contest between two sides: pro-choice and

pro-life. Perhaps the legal system also leads to that sort of dualistic

approach to complex issues. But that is not how the issue appears to

American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 76, No. 1 (January, 2017).

DOI: 10.1111/ajes.12175

V

C2017 American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc.

ordinary Americans. Even within the Catholic Church, which has made

its official stance against abortion and artificial birth control abundantly

clear, thelaity in the United States has formed itsown judgments, which

often do not conform to the official posit ion of the Church.

The same ambiguity on the subject of abortion can be found

throughout the world. Whether the law is restrictive or open, the pop-

ulace is aware of the many gray areas that exist in the world of actual

experience. Outside of the rarified world of canon law and abstract

theology, there are thousands or even millions of stories that under-

mine any certainties a principled argument might reach. But there are

few organized groups that are in a position to highlight the ambigui-

ties of the issue. Instead, the forces of political alignment put pressure

on everyone to take one side or the other.

An Issue with Many “Sides”

It should be obvious by now that neither “side” in the debate over

abortion is ever going to win. Yet, as long as we allow polarized

politics to set the tone of the discussion, we are unlikely ever to

find a stable equilibrium, a position that both recognizes the claims

of women to be the primary agents in weighing the moral complexi-

ties of abortion and the balancing claims of society to protect the

rights of fetuses or unborn children as persons. There will always be

some absolutists who wish to polarize debate. But the majority of

citizens believe issues about abortion are nuanced and complex,

particularly if they have had some direct experience with it or know

someone who has. A nuanced view introduces questions such as

the extenuating circumstances under which abortion is appropriate,

the people who should have a voice in making decisions about it,

the stages of a pregnancy when it should be allowed, the arbitrari-

ness of obstacles faced by poor women that pose no problems for

wealthy women, and so on.

Complexity is the best way to describe the attitudes of the Ameri-

can public on questions related to abortion. Kliff (2015) describes

the results of a poll of 1,067 Americans conducted by Vox.com that

contradicts the usual picture of Americans being divided on a simple

“pro” and “con” basis:

The American Journal of Economics and Sociology6