Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2007. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes bibliographical references (p. 63-68).

No description available.

This study aims to analyze the policy discourse held by interest groups in the United States following the repeal of Roe, the constitutional right to abortion, from a security perspective. Additionally, it seeks to examine what these organizations believe needs protection and against what, and the potential consequences for womenś health security in the USA. The study employs a security feminist and post-structuralist theoretical and methodological approach based on Bacchi’s (2023) problematization framework “What’s the problem represented to be?” (WPR) and Baldwin’s (1997) Security Concept to analyze how these interest groups perceive the abortion issue post-Roe and what this produces and reproduces. The analyst reveals a distinct and polarized view on the abortion issue regarding what should be protected and against what. These divergent perspectives influence how threats are perceived and what measures are advocated for. The study’s analysis also demonstrates that the politicized debate and the various problematizations may have adverse consequences for women’s health security, such as increased risks of unsafe abortions and lack of access to safe abortion care. Furthermore, the state-centric understanding of health policy may contribute to reproducing the stigma surrounding abortion and excluding women’s individual needs. This underscores the importance of questioning the prevailing health policy and its impact on women and other vulnerable groups, and raising the question: security for whom and for what?

No description available.

For the last few years, the question of legal abortion has been a big topic in USpolitics. With the two major US parties, Democrats and Republicans, havingdifferent opinions about the subject, and with a new abortion law introduced inJune of 2022.This study goes over the latest party platforms and different statements fromboth parties to get an understanding about how the both parties view abortionas a problem. With the use of critical discourse analysis as a methodology and“what’s the problem represented to be?” as an analytical framework, the studydoes not aim to present a solution to a problem, but instead show how the twoparties present the problem. Thereafter the ideologies feminism, conservatismand liberalism will be applied to see if it can be connected to how the partiespresent abortion as a problem. The results of the study reveal that theDemocratic party views abortion as a necessity for women's health and rights.The Democratic party does show signs of the ideologies feminism andliberalism in how they represent abortion. The Republicans view abortion assomething morally wrong and shows signs of conservatism.

Traces the inter-related histories of the eugenics movement and birth control, with an emphasis on abortion. Discusses Sarah Weddington's arguments and the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v Wade. Straws the eugenic influences in the case and asserts that these influences caused the decision to be less than decisive.

Building on Lee Epstein et al. (2006) article “The Changing Dynamics of Senate Voting on Supreme Court Nominees”, this study seeks to explore the representation of ideological questions during the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas and Brett M. Kavanaugh. As previous studies seek to explore the characteristics and political agenda of confirmation hearings, there is more to be discovered about the representation of ideological questions. In addition, more studies tend to explain the reasons why landmark decisions such as Roe v. Wade has managed to be overturned and scholars have demonstrated the need to study ideological polarization in the Supreme Court. To study overrulings and ideological polarization in the Supreme Court, this article explores the very beginning of the issue: the confirmation hearings of justices to the Supreme Court of the United States. By being attentive to the main themes of questions during the confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas and Brett M. Kavanaugh, this paper explores the representation of ideological questions versus questions of fact. This theoretical perspective facilitates the exploration of further studies regarding upcoming confirmation hearings. This article indicates the reliance on the theory of Lee Epstein et al., and claims that the previous confirmation hearings have a strong representation of ideological questions.

Existing literature has identified mothers as the primary reproductive educators of their daughters and has determined mother-daughter conversations about reproduction to be an indicator of daughters’ sexual and reproductive behaviors. The overturning of Roe v. Wade on June 24, 2022, had an immediate impact on the reproductive lives of many people, including daughters. Through one-on-one interviews with 10 daughters, this qualitative study identifies three changes in mother-daughter reproductive conversations that were influenced by the overturning of Roe v. Wade: (a) The initiation of conversations, (b) the topics of conversations, and (c) the tone of these conversations. The results of this thesis not only provide initial insight into how daughters felt that their conversations with their mothers about reproductive issues changed in the wake of this monumental event, but also have the potential to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the larger impact of the event itself.

The aim of this study is to analyze whether any media bias and framing can be observed in the U.S. news reporting surrounding the topic of the abortion debate. And if yes, how they are being presented to their respective audiences.For this, thirty articles have been analyzed in total; published respectively by Fox News and CNN in the timeframe of June 2021 until June 2023. This covers the time before, after, and during the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the law of Roe v. Wade. For the analysis I referred to Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis, as well as the theories of framing and media bias. Additionally, the theory of hegemony was applied to the results. These theoretical concepts were accompanied by a combined paradigmatic approach of interpretivism and critical theory.The results of the analysis indicate that both news outlets present bias, framing, and hegemonic ideologies within their reporting. The content of Fox News showed a tendency of an anti-abortion stance in its rhetoric, utilizing frames concerning morality, freedom, politics, and the abortion industry. Meanwhile, CNN’s content tended to take an oppositional stance by utilizing pro-abortion rhetoric, as well as frames concerning harmful information, freedom, the danger of Conservatives, and politics. These findings led me to conclude that there are significant implications for media hegemony inherent in the reporting of both outlets.

Hur kan begreppet support structures förstås i relation till det konstnärliga projektet SOLO SHOW? Denna uppsats behandlar arbetets villkor och synliggörandet av dessa inom konstens fält. Support structures (stödstrukturer) kan förstås som det arbete som upprätthåller, uppmuntrar, stärker och står bakom (något). Närmandet till ett, eller flera,”svar” på frågeställningen sker genom ett resonerande i relation till utsnitt ur Julia Bryan-Wilsons Art Workers: radical practice in the Vietnam war era, Hito Steyerls ”Is a Museum a Factory?” och hennes tolkning av termerna ”work” och ”occupation”, samt det genomgående teoretiska verktyget: begreppet support structures.