Silva Martha, Stolow Jeni, Burdick Micki, Mercieca Amy
Department of International Health and Sustainable Development, Celia Scott Weatherhead School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Department of Social, Behavioral and Population Sciences, Celia Scott Weatherhead School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Front Glob Womens Health. 2025 Apr 17;6:1533813. doi: 10.3389/fgwh.2025.1533813. eCollection 2025.
Following the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in , Louisiana enacted a "trigger law" banning nearly all abortions. Attempts to reform existing restrictive legislation so as to allow for abortions under exceptions have been unsuccessful to date. This study aims to describe how abortion discourse is framed in public testimony around House Bill 346 in the 2023 Louisiana legislative session, which attempted to pass an abortion exception for pregnancy in the case of rape or incest.
We conducted a conventional qualitative content analysis utilizing a rhetorical lens, using testimony transcripts from the May 10, 2023, Louisiana Administration of Criminal Justice Committee hearing. An iterative coding approach allowed us to categorize salient themes, language patterns, speaker characteristics, emotional tones, and rhetorical strategies. Demographic characteristics were ascribed to speakers based on perceived gender and race when not self-identified.
Testimony analysis revealed four primary themes: (1) conflicting representations of abortion, (2) religion's role in shaping discourse, (3) humanization of fetuses vs. pregnant individuals, and (4) debate over available resources for survivors and children. Abortion is represented as being traumatic, adding to the trauma caused by sexual violence, while representing childbearing as healing from trauma. Being conceived as a result of sexual violence is used as an identity marker worthy of protection. Religious rhetoric permeates testimony both in support and in opposition to abortion exceptions, making a "pro-life" stance the starting point for debate. Lastly, we find evidence of dehumanization of survivors' and others' experience.
The testimonies around HB346 expose deeply polarized discourse that reflects moral, religious, and ethical conflicts, as well as mismatched conversations that are unlikely to persuade opposing sides. Addressing these dissonant narratives requires nuanced advocacy strategies and resources to support effective testimony.
继美国最高法院2022年做出裁决后,路易斯安那州颁布了一项“触发法”,几乎禁止所有堕胎行为。迄今为止,改革现有限制性立法以允许在例外情况下堕胎的尝试均未成功。本研究旨在描述在2023年路易斯安那州立法会议围绕众议院第346号法案的公开证词中,堕胎议题是如何被构建的。该法案试图通过一项例外条款,允许在强奸或乱伦导致怀孕的情况下进行堕胎。
我们运用修辞视角进行了常规的定性内容分析,使用了2023年5月10日路易斯安那州刑事司法管理委员会听证会的证词记录。迭代编码方法使我们能够对突出主题、语言模式、发言者特征、情感基调及修辞策略进行分类。在发言者未自行表明的情况下,根据其性别和种族认知来确定人口统计学特征。
证词分析揭示了四个主要主题:(1)堕胎的矛盾表述;(2)宗教在塑造话语中的作用;(3)胎儿与孕妇的人性化对比;(4)关于幸存者和儿童可用资源的辩论。堕胎被描述为具有创伤性,加剧了性暴力造成的创伤,而生育则被视为从创伤中痊愈。因性暴力而受孕被用作值得保护的身份标志。宗教修辞在支持和反对堕胎例外条款的证词中都有体现,使“生命权”立场成为辩论的起点。最后,我们发现了对幸存者及其他人经历进行非人化的证据。
围绕众议院第346号法案的证词揭示了两极分化严重的话语,反映了道德、宗教和伦理冲突以及不太可能说服对方的不匹配对话。解决这些不一致的叙述需要细致入微的宣传策略和资源来支持有效的证词。