Mute Prayer Outside Abortion Clinics Is a Form of Reproductive Coercion

Christian prayer is usually an unquestioned activity in the UK, often constructed as benign or even positive. However, in some contexts prayer can be perceived as intimidating, particularly when it is considered ‘out of place’ or when the motives for prayer are questioned.

It is no wonder that most people consider prayer outside of abortion clinics to be wrong. British public opinion.

Following the legislation – which was passed, but not yet approved – to stop activism in the immediate vicinity of all abortion clinics in the UK, anti-abortion activists have he reacted stronglyarguing that introducing regulations prohibiting mute prayer would be a violation of their human rights.

However, anti-abortion activities in UK clinics are very diverse and are not constrained to practices of mute prayer. Our research on anti-abortion activism in the UK has shown that what happens during protests can change from hour to hour, depending on the people present.

Some protesters will try to connect with patients, others will say prayers – out deafening or silently – while others will hold signs or candles. Some will hand out leaflets or rosaries.

Many anti-abortion activists to argue that praying outside abortion clinics offers women choice and support, and this would be especially crucial if these women were forced to have abortions.

Yet activists’ deeply held faith-based opposition to abortion often prevents them from understanding the intimidation and harm the practice causes. can causeTheir position also ignores the fact that pressuring someone to continue a pregnancy is also a form of coercion.

Just prayer?

Although many anti-abortion activists claim they are “just praying,” women who come to abortion services have no idea of ​​the intentions of anti-abortion activists. For example, many women anxious or fearful because they don’t know how far activists will go to prevent them from entering the clinic.

Anti-abortion activists often deny that intimidation occurs, but in our fieldwork we witnessed women being persistently harassed and followed at miniature distances, even when the protest was advertised as a “peaceful prayer vigil.”

While physical violence between anti-abortion activists, clinic users, or the general public is scarce, it still happens. Such incidents may not be initiated by anti-abortion activists, and at times protesters may even be targets of violence and harassment from others.

However, the presence of anti-abortion activists in front of clinics makes the space intimidating and increases the risk potential violence.

It also has a negative impact on life. local residents who talk about their concerns about not being able to understand the motives of random strangers hanging around their homes, especially after shadowy.

It’s not just the general public that sees the negative impact of anti-abortion activism. We have Christians being interrogated who oppose abortion but nonetheless recognize that being outside of abortion clinics is not only inappropriate but also constitutes an “abuse of prayer.”

This view is not shared only by laypeople. We also found some Catholic priests did not support prayers outside abortion clinics.

Public shaming

Bringing public attention to the issue of abortion is central point of justification anti-abortion activists. Standing outside abortion clinics, anti-abortion activists invite passersby to pay attention to the service and the people who exploit it. The protest aims to make the decision about private health care a public spectacle.

While the expansive majority in the UK supporting access to abortionit remains stigmatized. By standing outside clinics, anti-abortion activists are trying to encourage public shaming as a way to deter abortion.

These two key points – individual intimidation and public shaming – have been recognised by courts in the UK, which have sought to uphold the buffer zones that already exist in several areas.

This Supreme Court found that the human rights of anti-abortion activists in Northern Ireland were restricted when they were prevented from being present outside an abortion service, but that this was a necessary and proportionate measure to protect the rights of women seeking abortions. It is particularly ironic that anti-abortion activists complain about the loss of their own freedom while seeking to restrict freedom of others noted.

Anti-abortion activists may claim to be out in clinics to support women, but our research shows that their actions are a form of reproductive coercion. Their prayers, including mute prayers, are a central part of that strategy.

It is crucial to realize that their actions actually constitute persecution of women through intimidation and public shaming, and they should direct their prayers elsewhere.