Forcing A Woman To Get Pregnant Isn’t A Crime, But Domestic Violence Experts Want To Change That

Men know it's harder for a woman to escape an abusive relationship if they have children to provide for.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/12/16/3070331/reproductive-coercion-domestic-violence-prevention/

By Tara Culp-Ressler on December 16, 2013

In the United States, it’s illegal to force a woman to take an abortion pill against her will. Every once in a while, charges will be brought against a man for tricking their partner into taking abortion-inducing drugs, a crime that can lead to decades in prison.

But what about the women who are forced into other reproductive health outcomes against their will? Although the anti-choice community frequently pushes to strengthen the legal protections against “coerced abortion,” it’s not currently against U.S. law to tamper with a woman’s birth control to try to trick her into getting pregnant. Domestic violence prevention advocates say this type of abuse is rampant, and should be punished more seriously in the eyes of the law.

The official term for this type of abuse is “reproductive coercion” — and it can encompass anything from poking holes in a condom without a woman’s knowledge, to hiding her birth control pills, to making her feel guilty about not wanting to have a baby, to trying to yank out her intrauterine device (IUD). If a woman does become pregnant, the coercion can either take the form of pressuring her to have an abortion when she wants a child, or pressuring her to continue an unwanted pregnancy when she wants an abortion.

According to a 2010 study into the issue, as many as 15 percent of low-income women who rely on public family planning clinics experience this type of tampering with their birth control. And it’s a particular prevalent aspect of abusive relationships — a clear sign that a man is attempting to control and manipulate his partner’s body.

-----

That’s not the case in every country. Last month, Canada’s highest court heard a case from a man who had deliberately punctured a condom to get his girlfriend pregnant and convince her not to leave him. But the reason Canada was able to prosecute that case is because its definition of consent includes effective contraception — the man’s girlfriend consented to sexual intercourse, but that consent was dependent upon the use of birth control, so sabotaging the condom violated her consent. In the United States, the legal definition of consent is more generalized. The Daily Beast points out that U.S. courts are less likely to consider what happened between two consenting adults after they both agreed to engage in sexual activity.

-----

And low-income women, who typically have to delay having an abortion while they save up the money for it, often run out of time and go on to have unintended births. The women who end up giving birth against their will are more likely to slip deeper into poverty and struggle with long-term mental health issues.