What do you think?
Rate this book
California Series on Social Choice and Political Economy
Abortion & the Politics of Motherhood
In this important study of the abortion controversy in the United States, Kristin Luker examines the issues, people, and beliefs on both sides of the abortion conflict. She draws data from twenty years of public documents and newspaper accounts, as well as over two hundred interviews with both pro-life and pro-choice activists. She argues that moral positions on abortion are intimately tied to views on sexual behavior, the care of children, family life, technology, and the importance of the individual.
324 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1984
11 people are currently reading
575 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
June 4, 2019
One must keep in mind when reading this book that it was published in 1984, and thus largely reflects the state of the debate at that time. But even so, it was a fascinating read if only to recall the state of the pro-life and pro-choice movements at that time. Interestingly, as late as 1984 the pro-life movement was predominantly Catholic, and the great Protestant taking up of the issue had not ocurred yet. But even if this history is not particularly interesting to you, perhaps you will find the earlier chapters on the history of the abortion from the time of the ancient Greeks through 19th century America fascinating.
November 23, 2025
Follow/Subscribe: YouTube, Patreon, Instagram
Feelings about the book:
- I read this because I wanted to see what the abortion debate was like pre-social media. And Luker delivered just that.
Premise/Plot:
- Aims to explore how people can have such differing opinions on abortion and the morality about it.
- Kristin Luker includes views from both pro-life and pro-choice activists.
Themes:
- Religion, motherhood, morality, physician power, women's rights, baby vs fetus distinctions, grassroot movements, legal battles and more
Pros:
- I really appreciated the way Luker documents how physicians play a vital role in both sides of the argument and always have done. By tracing it back to the landscape of the medical field in the 19th century, Luker explained the incentives regular physicians had in siding with the anti-abortionists.
- Luker did well to highlight the unassuming things that are quite significant. Like the pro-choice women who feel a type of way when women get multiple abortions.
- This is a nuanced exploration of both sides of the argument.
- This sheds some light into the history of our polarisation. This is still highly relevant for understanding modern ideological divides.
Cons:
- Luker could have gone in harder, I think. My that I mean intersectionality - more voices were needed for a fuller picture.
- No international comparison which would have been great to contrast with. Especially since this included such strong religious views and history.
Quotes:
‘Most importantly, perhaps, from the third century A.D. onward, Christian thought was divided as to whether early abortion – the abortion of an “unformed” embryo – was in fact murder. Different sources of church teachings and laws simply did not agree on the penalties for abortion or on whether early abortion is wrong.’
‘In political movements, language becomes politicised: a choice of words is a choice of sides. In referring to the form of life that exists between conception and birth, to use either the word fetus or the word baby is to make a political judgement.’
‘In other words, it is conceivable that the public movement on abortion might never have been successful had physicians not sought to amend the law that gave them the right to control abortion in the first place.’
‘A great many pro-choice activists in this study, particularly those active in helping women have abortions, find multiple abortions morally troubling. Some of them even volunteered the fact that they felt like personal failures when a woman came back to them for a second, third, or higher-order abortion.’
‘I think there’s a decline in our civilisation. Bracken, Dr. Julius Bracken, said that the problem used to be why does God allow suffering or pain or things like that, and now the problem is man’s own existence, you know, man believes that he’s in a circle of nothingness and therefore there is no such thing as a moral or immoral act.’
‘When they bargain for marriage, they use the same resources that they use in the labour market: upper-class status, an education very similar to a man’s, side-by-side participation in the man’s world, and, not least, a salary that substantially increases a family’s standard of living.’
‘The price of its stunning successes up to 1973 has been complacency: many pro-choice supporters assume that the battle was won years ago. And as their pro-life opponents discovered in the days after the Supreme Court decision, it is much easier to rally the indignant than to arouse the complacent.’
Feelings about the book:
- I read this because I wanted to see what the abortion debate was like pre-social media. And Luker delivered just that.
Premise/Plot:
- Aims to explore how people can have such differing opinions on abortion and the morality about it.
- Kristin Luker includes views from both pro-life and pro-choice activists.
Themes:
- Religion, motherhood, morality, physician power, women's rights, baby vs fetus distinctions, grassroot movements, legal battles and more
Pros:
- I really appreciated the way Luker documents how physicians play a vital role in both sides of the argument and always have done. By tracing it back to the landscape of the medical field in the 19th century, Luker explained the incentives regular physicians had in siding with the anti-abortionists.
- Luker did well to highlight the unassuming things that are quite significant. Like the pro-choice women who feel a type of way when women get multiple abortions.
- This is a nuanced exploration of both sides of the argument.
- This sheds some light into the history of our polarisation. This is still highly relevant for understanding modern ideological divides.
Cons:
- Luker could have gone in harder, I think. My that I mean intersectionality - more voices were needed for a fuller picture.
- No international comparison which would have been great to contrast with. Especially since this included such strong religious views and history.
Quotes:
‘Most importantly, perhaps, from the third century A.D. onward, Christian thought was divided as to whether early abortion – the abortion of an “unformed” embryo – was in fact murder. Different sources of church teachings and laws simply did not agree on the penalties for abortion or on whether early abortion is wrong.’
‘In political movements, language becomes politicised: a choice of words is a choice of sides. In referring to the form of life that exists between conception and birth, to use either the word fetus or the word baby is to make a political judgement.’
‘In other words, it is conceivable that the public movement on abortion might never have been successful had physicians not sought to amend the law that gave them the right to control abortion in the first place.’
‘A great many pro-choice activists in this study, particularly those active in helping women have abortions, find multiple abortions morally troubling. Some of them even volunteered the fact that they felt like personal failures when a woman came back to them for a second, third, or higher-order abortion.’
‘I think there’s a decline in our civilisation. Bracken, Dr. Julius Bracken, said that the problem used to be why does God allow suffering or pain or things like that, and now the problem is man’s own existence, you know, man believes that he’s in a circle of nothingness and therefore there is no such thing as a moral or immoral act.’
‘When they bargain for marriage, they use the same resources that they use in the labour market: upper-class status, an education very similar to a man’s, side-by-side participation in the man’s world, and, not least, a salary that substantially increases a family’s standard of living.’
‘The price of its stunning successes up to 1973 has been complacency: many pro-choice supporters assume that the battle was won years ago. And as their pro-life opponents discovered in the days after the Supreme Court decision, it is much easier to rally the indignant than to arouse the complacent.’
October 25, 2017
Luker offers an incredibly comprehensive approach to the abortion debate, analyzing all sides of the argument from an objective perspective, which is difficult to do with a topic as steeped in controversy as this one. They accurately trace the history of the abortion debate from the Ancient Greeks to the present, thus deeply examining the many arguments and claims being made by both Pro-Lifers and Pro-Choice people.
By analyzing the politics of motherhood, Luker is subtly making the claim that, at the core of the abortion debate, the argument is less about when life begins and more about the roles women play in society. She deftly analyzes the ideology surrounding women as mothers, and whether or not women are allowed to be citizens of the state, thus able to control their own bodies.
By analyzing the politics of motherhood, Luker is subtly making the claim that, at the core of the abortion debate, the argument is less about when life begins and more about the roles women play in society. She deftly analyzes the ideology surrounding women as mothers, and whether or not women are allowed to be citizens of the state, thus able to control their own bodies.
August 29, 2022
I really wanted to like this, but I found it frustrating. I do recognize that the book was published nearly 40 years ago, and that some of the data she draws from is now 60 years old. And I think that's the problem. Given what we know today about the anti-abortion movement, I'm not even sure that Luker's data is all that correct. Which is not to say that her data is wrong, just that placed in the context of the time (the rise of the New Right and the Reagan era, the burgeoning Evangelical movement), I'm not entirely convinced that she has captured the full social context of either the anti-abortion or pro-choice movements. I recognize this as being a watershed book in Sociology at the time, but I think we are long overdue for a new sociological understanding of this topic.
January 27, 2024
Yes, I realize that this book was published in 1984, but this book is "both sides" bullshit disguised as "scholarship," when, in fact, the research is woefully insufficient and tendentious, designed to normalize pro-life assaults on women's rights. I will give Luker this much. She does show that Roe v. Wade was comparatively mild in the grand scheme of abortion rights history. The problem is that these evil women-hating pro-lifers will never listen to reason in the manner that Luker suggests that they can. So this volume represents naivete at best and the corrupt entertainment of regressive and deeply anti-humanist viewpoints as legitimate at worst.
September 10, 2023
A well written discussion of both sides of the debate, and well-weighted too; I couldn't tell Luker's own stance without scrolling through her Wikipedia.
However, some comparisons raised were rather off-the-wall. One example that I've struggled to get over is questioning why pro-choice supporters don't support necrophilia. Bit of a jump, that one.
All in all an interesting read, and I'm keeping an eye out for a British counterpart.
However, some comparisons raised were rather off-the-wall. One example that I've struggled to get over is questioning why pro-choice supporters don't support necrophilia. Bit of a jump, that one.
All in all an interesting read, and I'm keeping an eye out for a British counterpart.
April 9, 2024
I initially picked this up as a chapter excerpt for background for a research project, but ended up buying the whole book because I enjoyed it so much. An interesting look at the intersections of (potential for) motherhood and one’s individual politics, and imo even more interesting since the Dobbs decision.
June 1, 2014
Wow, this is a tremendous book. I read it when it came out and I can still quote huge parts of it years later. It explains not only abortion but also the movement to home-school children. Basically, women who stay at home to raise children are demeaned in our society and made to feel "less than." Women who work are more highly valued, and considered more interesting, or at least that's the way it seems. Those professional women, who can use abortion to delay child-rearing, are seen as valued, and so those who oppose women scheduling childbirth and having careers, or those who are threatened by working women, are more likely to oppose abortion. Abortion is about the social strata of society as much as about protecting the unborn. I think this applies to home-schooling as well -- if you're not valued as a "mere housewife" then keep your children at home so that people value you for teaching your children yourself. We're not dealing with how women are making their choices, and so home-based women feel devalued, and the anti-abortion movement emerges from that.
Those who are anti-abortion will appreciate that the author comes to the conclusion that the anti-abortion side will win, arguing that pro-choice women have too many work demands on their time to work for choice, while anti-abortion women can dedicate 40 hours a week to the struggle.
So whichever side you're on, I recommend this book.
Those who are anti-abortion will appreciate that the author comes to the conclusion that the anti-abortion side will win, arguing that pro-choice women have too many work demands on their time to work for choice, while anti-abortion women can dedicate 40 hours a week to the struggle.
So whichever side you're on, I recommend this book.
April 28, 2009
Fascinating, upsetting, eye-opening look at how abortion effects WOMEN. Not just fetuses. Wish I could get my Dad to read this so that maybe he could view the pro-choice stance from a non-religious perspective and try to understand the politics surrounding abortion and what it has and does mean for women and their bodies. And what it means for a country that's supposed to promote equality. Because it's not just about abortion. It's about all of the other things you take control of when you try to control the right to choose. It's just amazing to see all this proof of how dangerous it is for women when there are laws prohibiting them from, literally, taking care of themselves, and I think it's incredibly important to read a non-emotional history of abortion laws and about the real life effects its had on women, about how cruel and invasive legislation has been. Doesn't mean the book will or should change your stance on abortion itself, but I think it's very much capable of opening people's eyes to the NEED for choice, and the struggle it's been for women to keep it.
November 5, 2015
An interesting and comprehensive look at the history of the abortion debate (note - not abortion itself) in the United States which manages to still feel remarkably applicable, despite being first published in 1985. Also manages to feel both like an academic overview and quite a close case study (with, for example, its interviews with activists on both sides). The focus on the shift of the issue from private to public, as well as the further implications of moral arguments on the status/politics of women's lives, offers an illuminating and non-emotional look at the trends in and history of the abortion debate.
February 24, 2014
I highly recommend this for anyone who would like to learn more about the history of the abortion debate and the beliefs of both the pro-life and pro-choice movements.
Kristin Luker is objective in her debate and presents the facts in an interesting, understandable matter. I could not find a trace of bias in one way or another, which is a relief.
Interesting and informative read.
Kristin Luker is objective in her debate and presents the facts in an interesting, understandable matter. I could not find a trace of bias in one way or another, which is a relief.
Interesting and informative read.
March 1, 2015
Examination of all sides of this contentious issue and the reasons, rationale, emotions and world-views of those supporting each side.
Discusses various diverse issues involved including whether aborting a fetus is murder, is a fetus a baby, bioethics, allocation of medical resources and changes in technology, "morality" definitions, history of abortion issue, and many other aspects.
Discusses various diverse issues involved including whether aborting a fetus is murder, is a fetus a baby, bioethics, allocation of medical resources and changes in technology, "morality" definitions, history of abortion issue, and many other aspects.
June 25, 2015
While I think there is no question that the author is pro-choice, she does a marvelous job of giving insight into the concerns of anti-abortion women and the ways in which they feel they are being attacked/threatened by sexual liberation.
July 14, 2016
Read snippets of the book for class, the entire book for pleasure. Very interesting POV's in the book, although some of the arguments seemed very repetitive throughout..
Currently reading
February 6, 2008I wonder how this holds up, over twenty years later.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews