At the origins -- The Movimento per la Vita (MpV) took shape in Florence
in 1975, in full ferment on the issue of abortion. It was born around agroup of young Catholics, "Iniziativa e riferimento", who launched a
signature collection with the document Declaration in defense of the
right to life. The MpV initially developed without party support, but
with the support of volunteers linked to the ecclesial world, and was
led by figures such as Carlo Casini. It was in this context that the
first Center for Help to Life was founded, marking the beginning of a
structured and persistent activity in the territory. After the Seveso
disaster, which turned the media spotlight on the issue, abortion
entered firmly into public discourse and in particular the movement's
activity intensified precisely at the same time as the DC's positions
softened in 1977. With the approach of the parliamentary debate and the
progressive softening of the Christian Democrats' line, the Movement
intensified its commitment and put forward its own bill on "welcoming
human life and social protection of maternity" which envisaged "the
establishment of reception and defense centers for human life", with the
aim of removing the social, psychological and economic causes of abortion.
Finally, on May 22, 1978, law 194 was approved, which only two years
later faced the challenge of two referendums, one by the MpV and one by
the Radical Party. With the referendum on the horizon, the Movement
formulates two proposals: a "maximal" one, which aims to completely
repeal the law on abortion, and a "minimal" one, which only allows the
therapeutic interruption of pregnancy, subject to a medical decision.
The Constitutional Court excludes the first, provoking a critical
reaction from the Church but finding the consensus of many Catholic
intellectuals, who claim the legitimacy of internal dissent in the
doctrine. The CEI, while reiterating its opposition to abortion, ends up
accepting a political compromise: the minimal proposal of the Movement
is better than the current law, and even better than the 194 than the
radical alternative.
After the defeat in the 1981 referendum, the Movimento per la Vita
reviews its strategy. He understands that absolute opposition does not
pay in a society now favorable to the law and decides to operate within
the possibilities offered by the legislation, including art. 2, which
allows counseling centers and hospitals to avail themselves of the
possibility of collaborating with organizations that deal with
"maternity assistance", thus focusing on the social action of the
Centers for Help to Life, not coincidentally in strong expansion in
those years. In the mid-nineties, Carlo Casini and the Movement relaunch
a more fruitful dialogue with politics by asking the government for a
concrete commitment in favor of the right to life and the family, in the
wake of the encyclical Evangelium vitae by John Paul II, who had
condemned abortion as a denial of the fundamental right to life and
called for greater Christian commitment and activism on the issue.
From the New Millennium: what changes
The 2000s mark a turning point in the rhetoric of those who are now
called pro-life, increasingly integrated into global political
discourses. An emblematic episode comes from the United States: on
January 22, 2002, a few months after the attack on the Twin Towers,
President George W. Bush proclaimed the "National Day of the Sanctity of
Life", reiterating an increasingly explicit link between security,
national identity and the defense of life from conception. In those same
years, the anti-abortion front in Italy also reorganized, giving life to
a galaxy of movements that evolved compared to the past: alongside the
Movement for Life - which in the meantime had over 600 branches and
approximately 20 thousand members - new acronyms and transversal
alliances emerged, capable of uniting Jesuits, members of Communion and
Liberation and Opus Dei, religious figures, politicians from
center-right and center-left parties, up to neo-fascist groups such as
Forza Nuova.
The focus is no longer just on law 194, but extends to bioethics and the
defense of the embryo, especially in relation to assisted fertilization.
The language is also changing: terms like "genocide" or "crime against
humanity" are entering the pro-life lexicon, while the condemnation of
abortion is based on supposedly "scientific" bases, such as references
to fetal suffering or prenatal imaging technologies. This new activism
is clearly visible at the World Congress of Families in Verona in 2019,
an event that brings together exponents and financiers of an
increasingly coordinated international front. Sponsors include Toni
Brandi, founder of ProVita (founded in 2012), the ultra-conservative
Spanish group CitizenGo, and leading figures from the American religious
right. Among them are Brian Brown, president of the Howard Center for
Family, Religion and Society and close to Donald Trump, but also Allan
Carlson, former member of the Reagan administration. The Verona case
confirms the full transnationalization of the anti-abortion discourse: a
global alliance capable of connecting local movements, religious
ideologies and political actors of various origins under a common battle
"in defense of life".
Renewed by the new international climate outlined by the Dobbs v.
Jackson ruling - a true anti-abortion victory - which eliminated the
right to abortion recognized at the federal level since 1973, also in
Italy the new Meloni government has recognized a series of additional
"privileges" to pro-life groups.
On April 23, the Senate approved an amendment to Legislative Decree
19/2024. This amendment allows for financing, through the funds of the
National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR), anti-abortion associations
so that they can operate within counseling centers. In fact, the Regions
will be able to "avail themselves of the collaboration of third sector
entities with proven experience in supporting maternity" to organize
counseling services. In practice, this opens the doors to groups opposed
to abortion. This is not an absolute novelty, but now this possibility
has official political support, sanctioned in writing.
The presence of anti-abortion associations in counseling centers,
therefore, does not formally conflict with Giorgia Meloni's frequent
calls for compliance with Law 194, which in Italy regulates voluntary
termination of pregnancy and which has long been the subject of
criticism by the transfeminist movement. Article 2 of the law
establishes that "the counseling centers, on the basis of specific
regulations or agreements, can avail themselves of the voluntary
collaboration of grassroots social groups and suitable volunteer
associations, also for the support of difficult maternity after
childbirth." It is on the basis of this article that, over time,
anti-abortion groups have been able to find space in counseling centers,
often under different names. Today, however, government support is
clear: funding is changing and above all who decides which associations
will be able to operate in the clinics - no longer the internal
multidisciplinary team, but directly the Regions.
Consequently, these spaces dedicated to health will undergo a decision
imposed from above. It is also foreseeable that territorial disparities
will increase, with significant differences in access and quality of
services offered from one Region to another, depending on local
political orientations.
A disturbing present/future
In the last two years, the Italian anti-abortion front has found new
momentum, favored by a national and international political climate that
legitimizes its narratives and initiatives. Some legislative proposals
and institutional positions show a subtle but effective strategy: from
the proposal to attribute legal personality to the fetus, to the
recognition of the "double homicide" in cases of femicide of pregnant
women, up to the recent proposal for the adoption of embryos put forward
by Minister Eugenia Roccella. These interventions, although presented as
protective measures, all imply a redefinition of the legal status of the
embryo or fetus, with the concrete risk of transversally undermining the
right to abortion. This is precisely the point: none of these
initiatives formally touches on law 194, consistently with what has been
declared several times by the government in office. Yet, by acting on
the margins of the legislative device, these proposals end up weakening
its effectiveness and calling into question its assumptions.
On the other hand, it is law 194 itself - with its compromising
structure, the interpretative margins and the ambiguity between law and
protection - that has opened spaces of ambivalence that are now
exploited to attack self-determination without repealing anything. In
this scenario, the future that emerges is not that of a frontal attack,
but of a systematic and silent erosion, in which the right to abortion
remains formally intact but progressively emptied of meaning and
applicability.
This strategy is not isolated: even at the international level, we are
witnessing a similar dynamic of normative and cultural rearticulation.
In the United States, after the Dobbs v. Jackson ruling, many states
have introduced total bans or severe restrictions on abortion. However,
even there, in addition to direct repression, indirect measures are
multiplying: criminalization of women and doctors, restrictions on the
use of the abortion pill, digital surveillance. In both contexts, a
disturbing present/future emerges in which abortion remains formally
possible - in the United States, not in all states - but increasingly
difficult to practice. This is an offensive that unites different
nations in a common strategy of controlling reproductive capacities,
acting not so much with absolute bans but with a slow and meticulous
emptying of the right.
The answer is and will always be the same: the answer is from below!
In a context in which the right to abortion is being eroded with
indirect regulatory tools, caught between insidious legislative
proposals and paternalistic narratives, the most radical and necessary
answer continues to come from below. This is where Facciamo da noi - un
festival sull'abbandono was born, which will be held on May 9, 10 and 11
in Pisa in the spaces of Exploit and Casa della donna, organized by our
collective Obiezione Respinta (OBRES). We are a group born from the
bottom and from a concrete experience of mutualism - the mapping of
objectors and the accompaniment to the IVG - which over the years has
grown, as well as the work for the construction of new practices to
guarantee a free, safe, free abortion, transforming itself into a true
transfeminist political laboratory, capable of creating networks,
practices and imaginaries beyond the emergency.
In particular, on May 10 at 6 pm, the round table hosted at Exploit will
see some of the most active realities in the international fight for a
free, safe and free abortion dialogue: Shout Your Abortion from the
United States, Socorristas en Red from Argentina, Le Planning Familial
from France and the Ad'iyah Collective from the United Kingdom. A moment
of fundamental exchange to recognize that the attack on reproductive
bodies is global, but the response can and must also be global. From
Argentina to the USA, from France to Italy, abortion is not just a
right: it is a political practice that affirms autonomy, creates
alliances and imagines radically different worlds. In a present marked
by institutional regressions, meeting, telling each other and organizing
remains the only possible antidote. Because we have always done it and
will continue to do so: we do it ourselves!
Objection Rejected
https://umanitanova.org/dal-basso-e-senza-permesso-riscrivere-laborto-riscrivere-il-presente/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten