Historical Priorities and the Responses of Doctors' Associations to Abortion Reform Proposals in Britain and the United States, 1960–1973

Author： Halfmann Drew

Publisher： University Of Chicago Press

ISSN： 0037-7791

Source： Social Problems, Vol.50, Iss.4, 2003-11, pp. : 567-591

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

In the 1960s and early 1970s, policy-makers in Britain and the United States considered proposals to make abortions more readily available. The main doctors' associations in each country responded differently to these proposals. Doctors' associations in both countries initially sought to preserve clinical autonomy by ensuring that doctors could continue to "diagnose" the "medical necessity" of abortions. However, the American Medical Association (AMA) eventually changed its position to allow abortion on request. The study explains this difference by way of an "historical priorities" approach to analyzing the construction of collective political demands. It argues that "policy legacies" provide contexts in which collective actors prioritize among their policy desires. The study finds that because of differing health care policy legacies British doctors' associations viewed abortion clinical autonomy as a higher priority than did the AMA. Moreover, British doctors' associations were most concerned about patient infringements on clinical autonomy, while the AMA was equally concerned about state infringements on autonomy.