Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Sometimes, when I reflect on the state of the world and the shifts within my own country, I’m struck by how quickly societies seem to evolve. It’s as if we take two steps forward, then one step back—or, at times, two steps forward and ten steps back—before surging ahead by leaps and bounds every few decades. I don’t have to look far to see this in action. In India, over the past 30 years, society has shifted from a predominantly secular public face to one deeply conscious and deliberate in expressing religious and cultural identity. This article is a collection of my rambling as I attempt to rationalize these changes to make sense of my chaotic reality.
The not-so-grand hypothesis
Looking at history alongside recent events, I can’t help but observe that these changes follow a cyclical pattern, with periods of liberalism and conservatism shaping societal and individual attitudes, often influenced by the social or perceived realities of those affected. This applies to multiple aspects, such as religion, economic and immigration policy, reproductive rights, and people’s perspectives on feminism, which go through these cyclical shifts.
Theories
When I decided to explore this topic, I looked for theories that might support this hypothesis. I found a few, such as Oswald Spengler’s The Decline of the West and Peter Turchin’s Secular Cycles. While these were interesting theories, they didn’t fit the bill. Further research revealed concepts and theories like Social Identity Theory and cultural hegemony, which resonated with my hypothesis to a large extent. This can support the idea of social identity theory and cultural hegemony, underlying the existence or conflict between beliefs and attitudes in the first place.
Reproductive Rights
The history of reproductive rights and freedom is deeply subjective to the region, culture, and societal norms, so it would be unjust to generalize it. However, the attitude towards reproductive rights has undergone a fundamental shift on a global scale, with some countries experiencing a more drastic change than others. Below is a brief review of the trajectory of the United States, the UK, and India. What is common in these countries is that abortion, legal and illegal, has been performed in these countries for centuries before it came under the oversight of society.
USA
Before the 19th century, between the 1600s and about 1880, most common law societies allowed for hushed abortions before quickening, i.e., before fetal movement is felt around four months of pregnancy. Many Indigenous communities knew how to induce abortions. This changed in the 1880s with the politicization of the issue. By 1910, the abortion ban was nationwide, and only those with access to resources managed to skirt around the law and access it. Underground abortions had a high death toll. Nearly 2700 women died from unsafe abortions in 1930. In the 1960s, in the wake of activism, abortion laws were reformed. Gradually, between the 1960s and 1973, eleven states enacted reforms to their abortion laws. A decisive moment in US legal history was the Roe v Wade decision, which legalized abortion nationwide. The subsequent backlash and administrative push and pull over abortion laws, polarized political entrenchment along the lines of pro-choice and pro-life perhaps explains why reproductive rights are so contentious in the United States.
Looking at these issues as a woman makes me wonder why a country that I, as an Indian woman, admired for its robust, audacious women’s liberation movement. Something that never took off in India. However, looking at the trajectory, I find that perhaps the not precisely a cyclical evolution of policy but rather a pendulum swing of government decisions can be attributed to a few factors: (i) the fact that the matter was never seen as a settled matter. The sizeable section of society that was against it saw the prevalence of the pro-life stance as cultural hegemony at play, where social institutions were used to establish the ideology of those in power. Sections of society that didn’t accept the decision and continued to organize against it without letting it fade with time give the impression that the issue was seen as one side winning and the other begrudgingly waiting on the sidelines until a moment to take control.
(ii) The issue’s polarized political and moral entrenchment made it symbolic of power. A war of push and pull between government administrations based on power seemed to continue at the expense of women, particularly black women and other marginalized communities. This explains the encroachment of the right through administrative moves such as the Hyde Amendment, which precludes the use of Medicaid funds for abortion services, disproportionately affecting low-income, black, Hispanic, and LGBTQIA+ communities. The 2022 Dobbs v Jackson decision overturned Roe v Wade, allowing states to regulate or ban abortion individually.
England, Scotland and Wales
Contrary to the other countries mentioned in the article, England, Scotland, and Wales have not decriminalized abortion but have provided an exception where women can avail of abortion if they meet certain conditions under the 1967 Abortion Act, which requires abortion to be approved by two independent doctors. Abortions can only be performed in an NHS Hospital or a place approved by the Secretary of State. The framing of the exception made abortion a health issue rather than a political one, making it fall under the purview of healthcare professionals. Studies show that these requirements are not strictly followed, with one study showing 771 health professionals were unaware of the legal requirement requiring two doctors to sign off on every abortion.
Recent demands to decriminalize abortion, following the lead of Ireland, can be seen as a shift in societal attitudes and beliefs. Calls for decriminalization are also framed in terms of improving women’s health, providing effective care, and supporting overworked NHS professionals. While public opinion is unclear on the issue, the framing plays a significant role in understanding the cyclical shifts around reproductive health.
India
I look at India because it is my home country, but also because it managed to formalize reproductive rights without much strife or political opposition. I have always thought this monumental shift in a country where women had little agency over their lives, and some still do, was quite paradoxical. While how many women get to exercise these rights is a different story, there have been studies to show that MTPA (Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971) was a consequence of two things: (i) an attempt to protect women from unscrupulous medical providers and the alarming number of women who accessed abortion through underground providers, and (ii) frankly the government’s more alarming need for population control.
This decision may not be a direction to recognize the woman’s autonomy over her body. Still, finally, it paved the way for Supreme Court decisions that maternal mortality is a violation of human rights. Also, reproductive choices are a fundamental right to personal liberty under the Constitution. While global trends move towards a conservative approach that considers the fetus’s right to outweigh the rights of the woman, India has yet to show this side of the argument. Society doesn’t seem to be divided on the laws and is more preoccupied with laws that differentiate between people of different religious communities. For example, cases such as the Triple Talaq and the entry of menstruating women into Sabarimala (a Hindu temple) have caught the popular imagination. Both cases discuss women’s rights in different contexts; society is divided on religious autonomy and liberalization.
Regardless, at the core, the arguments on both sides often center around state interference in religious matters versus the ideals of liberalism and a uniform civil code. Women’s rights, while impacted, tend to be a consequential outcome rather than the foundation of these debates. This aligns with Social Identity Theory, which suggests that individuals derive a sense of belonging and self-esteem from their group identity, particularly in times of perceived threat. Communities are more likely to rally around issues that challenge their core identity—such as state interference in religious practices—while reproductive rights, unless seen as threatening that identity, may not trigger intense resistance. In this case, reproductive laws, as long as they don’t interfere with the community’s ability to self-regulate or uphold its values, remain outside the immediate focus of societal pushback. This helps explain why, even in conservative societies, reproductive rights can exist without being a primary target of cyclical shifts between liberalism and conservatism.
Conclusion
Looking at the evolution of abortion laws in the countries above gives me the impression that the cyclical shift, its existence, and its trajectory depend on factors such as political polarization, context and framing of an issue, cultural norms, and political society. Societal shifts are constant, often following a discernible cyclical pattern—moving from conservatism and inward focus to outward-looking liberalism, only to revert to a more insular approach once again. While this may simplify the complex forces that drive societal change, it does offer a way to make sense of the sometimes-disorienting cultural shifts we witness. Perhaps it is my own optimism that leads me to see the world through this lens, believing that even in uncomfortable periods, change will eventually bring better times.
References
India’s Push-and-Pull on Reproductive Rights. Read here.
Lessons from Before Roe: Will Past be Prologue? Read here.
Abortion Is Central to the History of Reproductive Health Care in America. Read here.
UK abortion law – what you need to know. Read here.
Author
