Author
Abstract
This article examines how medical practices construct gestational age and affect access to abortion care. While abortion laws typically establish gestational limits, the clinical determination of gestational age remains a medical responsibility, requiring healthcare professionals to interpret and apply these limits through various dating methods and practices. Based on ethnographic observation in three French abortion centers and interviews with 133 healthcare professionals, this study reveals significant variations in dating practices. These variations occur at three levels: the moment chosen for dating (consultation versus procedure day), the method chosen for dating and the measurement rules applied when pregnancies are dated by ultrasound. The study demonstrates that these technical choices result from negotiations and sometimes conflicts among physicians with different dispositions regarding women's reproductive autonomy and fetal interests. Consequently, a woman might be considered eligible for legal abortion in one center but beyond the legal limit in another. This creates a previously undocumented form of inequality in abortion access that operates through seemingly objective medical instruments. The analysis contributes to understanding how healthcare professionals serve as “legal intermediaries” who must interpret the law through technical devices to apply it. It also reveals how medical instruments, while appearing as objective clinical tools, function as political devices that define in practice what abortion and the right to abortion are. These findings have significant implications for reproductive health equity and policy implementation beyond the French context.
Suggested Citation
Perrin, Raphaël, 2025.
"The medical construction of gestational age and its effects on abortion access,"
Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 382(C).
Handle:
RePEc:eee:socmed:v:382:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625007087
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118377
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:382:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625007087. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.