Sociology ETDs

Publication Date

Spring 2017

Abstract

Objective. To analyze legislative use of the cultural and epistemic authority of science and medical expertise to regulate the practice of medicine in the area of abortion care. Methods. Using qualitative content analysis of 184 pieces of Texas legislative proposals between 1993 and 2015 this research examines how legislators to deploy medical expertise to justify abortion restrictions despite constraints from the courts. Results. Texas legislation co-opts symbols of science and medical expertise including technical language, references to empirical evidence, and a stance of objectivity. Constraints from the courts influence this focus on “medically necessary” measures and objective, scientifically supported regulations. These legislative proposals frame expert knowledge as the basis of good decision making, simultaneously obscuring questions about the relevance of such knowledge to women’s decision-making process and framing women as uniformed and therefore potentially vulnerable. Legislative proposals merge this disciplinary co-optation with long-standing abortion myths (the desperate, vulnerable woman at the mercy of the unscrupulous abortion doctor) reinforcing the claim that the state of Texas should take a protective, patriarchal role in regulating the medical practice of abortion. Conclusion. This analysis traces the emergence of a new strategy in restrictive abortion lawmaking: co-opting expertise to regulate experts. This research contributes to our understanding of the use of scientific knowledge and authority in political and legal disputes.

Degree Name

Sociology

Level of Degree

Masters

Department Name

Sociology

First Committee Member (Chair)

Owen Whooley

Second Committee Member

Kristin Kay Barker

Third Committee Member

Aubrey L. Jackson

Language

English

Document Type

Thesis

Download

Included in

Sociology Commons

Share

COinS