{"title":"'We had that abortion together': abortion networks and access to il/legal abortions in Turkey.","authors":"Sinem Esengen","doi":"10.1080/13691058.2023.2301410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Abortion was legalised in Turkey in 1983 with a 10-week limit, restrictions on who could provide abortions, and spousal or parental consent requirements. Currently, although abortion is legal, because of structural barriers, access is restricted (O'Neil, Altuntaş, and Keskin 2020). This study aimed to investigate how women strategically mobilise their social networks to overcome such restrictions to abortion care. Drawing from 25 in-depth interviews with urban-educated cis-women aged 24-30, I identify three groups within abortion networks: included, excluded and ambiguous. While included groups comprised largely of female family and friends, excluded groups were male family members and organisations, and the ambiguous category included health professionals and partners. Supporting findings in other contexts, individuals initially utilise their abortion networks to access the provider, they then build abortion solidarity networks to act as buffers against groups they wish to exclude during the abortion experience. Additionally, I show that excluded and ambiguous networks also impact abortion access, decision-making, and experience, even pushing individuals to follow through with illegal or semi-legal abortion procedures. Findings draw attention to the structural boundaries surrounding abortion laws, how patriarchal institutions make access to abortion care and abortion networks challenging, and how social networks may be utilised to alleviate such obstacles.</p>","PeriodicalId":10799,"journal":{"name":"Culture, Health & Sexuality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture, Health & Sexuality","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2023.2301410","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abortion was legalised in Turkey in 1983 with a 10-week limit, restrictions on who could provide abortions, and spousal or parental consent requirements. Currently, although abortion is legal, because of structural barriers, access is restricted (O'Neil, Altuntaş, and Keskin 2020). This study aimed to investigate how women strategically mobilise their social networks to overcome such restrictions to abortion care. Drawing from 25 in-depth interviews with urban-educated cis-women aged 24-30, I identify three groups within abortion networks: included, excluded and ambiguous. While included groups comprised largely of female family and friends, excluded groups were male family members and organisations, and the ambiguous category included health professionals and partners. Supporting findings in other contexts, individuals initially utilise their abortion networks to access the provider, they then build abortion solidarity networks to act as buffers against groups they wish to exclude during the abortion experience. Additionally, I show that excluded and ambiguous networks also impact abortion access, decision-making, and experience, even pushing individuals to follow through with illegal or semi-legal abortion procedures. Findings draw attention to the structural boundaries surrounding abortion laws, how patriarchal institutions make access to abortion care and abortion networks challenging, and how social networks may be utilised to alleviate such obstacles.