Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:21:13.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pronatalism, Gender Politics, and the Renewal of Family Support in Russia: Toward a Feminist Anthropology of “Maternity Capital”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Michele Rivkin-Fish
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines the gendered consequences of linking family support to state pronatalist goals in contemporary Russia. By analyzing the policies, proposals, and critiques circulating on the maternity capital program, Michele Rivkin-Fish demonstrates how state power and citizenship are being constructed through struggles over the meanings of gender and family. She further argues that studies of Russian demographic politics must bring attention to both institutional transformations and the symbolic levels of discourse. This holistic approach, rooted in feminist anthropology, illuminates the particular, cultural logics informing demographic debates as well as the apparent contradictions between ideologies, policies, and practices. Pronatalist discourses engage Russian politicians, experts, and laypersons in efforts to undo the troubling legacy of Soviet gender relations and the 1990s fertility crisis; in the process, these policies define and deploy state power in ways that sustain and normalize gender inequalities.

Type
Articles
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 69 , Issue 3 , Fall 2010 , pp. 701 - 724
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the 2008 Meetings of the American Ethnological Society, at the Center for Russian, East European, and Eurasian Studies of the University of Michigan, and at the Department of Anthropology at Indiana University. I thank participants at those presentations for their helpful comments on this project. I also express my deep appreciation to Jane Collins, Linda Cook, Maxine Eichner, Elena Gapova, Julie Hemment, Sarah Phillips, Ziggy Rivkin-Fish, Anna Temkina, Jane Zavisca, Sergei Zakharov, Elena Zdravomyslova, and Tatiana Zhurzhenko for their instructive suggestions for improving this article. Any remaining errors are mine alone. For the epigraph, see Ol'ga Shadiina, “Ispytaniia roditel'skoi liubvi,” Ekspert Sibir' 2007, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2007/0273/gazeta014.php (last accessed 3June 2010).

1 V. Putin, “Annual Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation,” 10 May 2006, at www.kremlin.ru/eng/speeches/2006/05/10/1823_type70029type82912_105566.shtml (last accessed 3June 2010).

2 The sum paid to a mother, father, or other relative who provides care for a child under 18 months of age was raised to 1,500 rubles (slightly less than $56.00) for the first child, and to 3,000 rubles (slightly less than $111.00), for the second. This allowance is for family caregivers who are not in the official workforce. L. N. Ovcharova and A. I. Pishniak, “Novye mery podderzhki materinstva i detstva: Stimulirovanie rozhdaemosti ili rost urovnia zhizni semei s det'mi?” SPERO: Sotsial'naia politika: Ekspertiza, rekomendatsii, obzory,no. 6 (Spring-Summer 2007): 8; Anna Rotkirch, Anna Temkina, and Elena Zdravomy-slova, “Who Helps the Degraded Housewife? Comments on Vladimir Putin's Demographic Speech” European Journal of Women's Studies 14, no. 4 (2007): 351.

3 Linda Cook, “Oil Wealth and Welfare in the Russian Federation: The Shift toward Statism” (paper presented at the conference, “Redefining the Common Good after Communism: A Conference on Change and Continuity in Post-Socialist Societies,” Bowdoin College, 1 May 2009).

4 In late 2008, the law was changed to allow early payouts only for paying down mortgage debt (not for pensions or education), starting 1 January 2009. See www.rost. ru/print/news/2008/12/221543_15896.shtml (last accessed 3 June 2010). I thank Jane Zavisca for this reference.

5 Gal, Susan and Kligman, Gail, The Politics of Gender after Socialism: A Comparative-Historical Essay (Princeton, 2000);CrossRefGoogle Scholar Read, Rosie and and Thelen, Tatjana, “Introduction: Social Security and Care after Socialism: Reconfigurations of Public and Private”, Focaal, no. 50 (2007): 3–;18.Google Scholar

6 Methodologically, this article relies on the analysis of texts stemming from demographic analysis, sociology, and related academic research, journalism, and blogs (known in Russia as “live journals”). It takes its inspiration from feminist anthropology theoretically, by aiming to combine—and navigate the tension between—an anthropological elucidation of the logics underlying local knowledge about gender and a feminist critique of how these logics relate to and often sustain gendered inequalities. This complex orientation has animated the subdiscipline historically and continues to inform much of feminist anthropological research today. See Strathern, Marilyn, “An Awkward Relationship: The Case of Feminism and Anthropology”, Signs 12, no. 2 (Winter 1987): 276–;92;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Mascia-Lees, Frances, Sharpe, Patricia, and Cohen, Colleen Ballerino, “The Postmodernist Turn in Anthropology: Cautions from a Feminist Perspective”, Signs 15, no. 1 (Autumn 1989): 7–;33;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Hemment, Julie, Empowering Women in Russia: Activism, Aid, and NGOs (Bloomington, 2007).Google Scholar

7 O'Connor, Julia, Orloff, Ann Shola, and Shaver, Sheila, States, Markets, and Families: Gender, Liberalism, and Social Policy in Australia, Canada, Great Britain, and the United States(Cambridge, Eng., 1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 McDonald, Peter, “Gender Equity in Theories of Fertility Transition”, Population and Development Revieiu 26, no. 3 (September 2000): 427–;39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Important work includes Yuval-Davis, Nira, Gender and Nation (London, 1997);Google Scholar Fraser, Nancy, Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse, and Gender in Contemporary Social Theory (Minneapolis, 1989), 144–;60;Google Scholar Fraser, Nancy and Gordon, Linda, “A Genealogy of ‘Dependency’: Tracing a Keyword of the US Welfare State”, Signs 19, no. 2 (Winter 1994): 309–;36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Read and Thelen, “Introduction,” 5.

11 Gal and Kligman, Politics of Gender after Socialism.

12 Ibid., 21–;22.

13 Funk, Nanette and Mueller, Magda, eds., Gender Politics and Postcommunism: Reflections from Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union (New York, 1993);Google Scholar Hemment, Empowering Women in Russia; Beth Holmgren, “Bug Inspectors and Beauty Queens: The Problems of Translating Feminism into Russian,” in Berry, Ellen E., ed., Post-Communism and the Body Politic (New York, 1995), 15–;31;Google Scholar Kay, Rebecca, Men in Contemporary Russia: The Fallen Heroes of Post-Soviet Change? (Burlington, Vt., 2006);Google Scholar Kay, Rebecca, “Caring for Men in Contemporary Russia: Gendered Constructions of Need and Hybrid Forms of Social Security”, Focaal, no. 50 (2007): 51–;65;Google Scholar Rivkin-Fish, Michele, ”‘Change Yourself and the Whole World Will Become Kinder’: Russian Activists for Reproductive Health and the Limits of Claims Making for Women”, Medical Anthropology Quarterly 18, no. 3 (2004): 281–;304;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Rivkin-Fish, Michele, Women's Health in Post-Soviet Russia: The Politics of Intervention (Bloomington, 2005);Google Scholar Read and Thelen, “Introduction.”

14 Although the Soviet state touted its commitment to “women's emancipation,” institutionalized equality meant women's full participation in the labor force, not freedom. In the early 1920s, women's reproductive bodies—from pelvic width to menstrual output—were measured and monitored to assess their capacities to serve national needs. Janet Hyer, “Managing the Female Organism: Doctors and the Medicahzation of Women's Paid Work in Soviet Russia during the 1920s,”in Marsh, Rosalind, ed., Women in Russia and Ukraine (Cambridge, Eng., 1996), 111–;20;Google Scholar Bernstein, Frances L., The Dictatorship of Sex: Lifestyle Advice for the Soviet Masses (DeKalb, 2007).Google Scholar Although the Bolsheviks legalized abortion in 1920, they did not condone the limitation of births, and physicians debated the wisdom of legalizing contraception, for they viewed birth control as a threat to population growth. Solomon, Susan Gross, “The Demographic Argument in Soviet Debates over the Legalization of Abortion in die 1920s”, Cahiers du Monde russe el sovietique?>2>, no. 1 (1992): 12.Google Scholar In 1936, Iosif Stalin criminalized the procedure and inaugurated a comprehensive pronatalist program. Women sought every possible means to obtain abortions, and maternal mortality rates skyrocketed. In 1944, another pronatalist law providing extensive family support was passed in the wake of enormous population losses during World War II. Stalin and Nikita Khrushchev presented this new law to the public as a measure to improve the population's health, but their internal correspondence emphasized that family support aimed to increase fertility. The state's self-serving interests could be obscured by asserting concerns for societal welfare and motherhood. Khrushchev legalized abortion in 1955 but continued the pronatalist stance. Doctors were instructed to undertake a new wave of pronatalist propaganda with patients, and contraceptives were in deficit until the end of the Soviet regime. Nakachi, Mie, “N. S. Khrushchev and the 1944 Soviet Family Law: Politics, Reproduction, Language”, East European Politics and Societies 20 (2006): 40–;68;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Field, Deborah Ann, Private Life and Communist Morality in KJirushchev's Russia (New York, 2007);Google Scholar Popov, Andrej and David, Henry P., “Russian Federation and USSR Successor States”, in David, Henry P., ed., From Abortion to Contraception: A Resource to Public Policies and. Reproductive Behavior in Central and Eastern Europe from 1917 to thePresent (Westport, Conn., 1999), 223–;77.Google Scholar

15 Zdravomyslova, Elena and Temkina, Anna, “Gosudarstvennoe konstruirovanie gendera v sovetskom obshchestve”, Zhurnnl issledovanii sotsial'noi politiki], no. 3/4 (2003): 306–;7.Google Scholar

16 Ibid., 308.

17 Ashwin, Sarah, “Introduction: Gender, State and Society in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia”, in Ashwin, Sarah, ed., Gender, State and Society in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia (London, 2000), 1–;29.Google Scholar

18 Cited in David, Henry P., “Overview”, in David, , ed., From Abortion to Contraception, 234;Google Scholar Borisov, V. A., Perspektivy rozhdaemosti (Moscow, 1976), 13–;16, 118–;21;Google Scholar Lapidus, Gail W., Women, in Soviet Society: Equality, Development, and Social Change (Berkeley, 1978), 291, 311;Google Scholar Piskunov, V. P. and Steshenko, V. C., “O demograficheskoi politike sotsialisticheskogo obshchestva”, in Steshenko, V. C. and Piskunov, V. P., eds., Demograficheskaia politika (Moscow, 1974), 24.Google Scholar

19 For examples of the few discussions of the unequal, gendered burden of domestic responsibilities, see Zdravomyslova and Temkina, “Gosudarstvennoe konstruirovanie gendera v Sovetskom obshchestve, ”317–;18.

20 Antonov, Anatolii I. and Medkov, V. M., Vtoroi rebenok (Moscow, 1986), 89, 290.Google Scholar See also Antonov, Anatolii I., Sotsiologiia rozhdaemosti (Moscow, 1980);Google Scholar Antonov, Anatolii I., Sem'ia i deti (Moscow, 1982);Google Scholar Antonov, Anatolii I., “Sem'ia kak institut sredi drugikh sotsial'nykh institutov”, in Antonov, Anatolii I. and Negodin, V. V., eds., Sem'ia naporoge tret'ego tysiacheletiia(Moscow, 1995), 182–;98;Google Scholar Sinel'nikov, A. B., “Sotsial'nye i emotsional'nopsikhologicheskie aspekty i potrebnosti individa v sem'e i detiakh”, in Antonov, A. I., Kadyrov, Sh. Kh. and G. E. Tsuladze, eds., Planirovanie sent'i i natsional'nye traditsii (Moscow, 1988), 47–;51.Google Scholar

21 Rivkin-Fish, Michele, “Anthropology, Demography, and the Search for a Critical Analysis of Fertility: Insights from Russia”, American Anthropologist 105, no. 2 (June 2003): 289–;301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 Gorbachev, Mikhail, “On Women and Family”, Population and Development Review 13, no. 4 (December 1987): 758;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Antonov, Sotsiologiia rozhdaemosti.

23 The state invested relatively little to relieve women's double burden: In 1974, the Soviet state established a child allowance program and extended maternity leave benefits. It further expanded these entitlements in 1981 for second and higher order births, extending partially paid maternity leave to all women and eventually offering a three-year maternity leave. See Helen Desfosses, “Pro-Natalism in Soviet Law and Propaganda,” in Desfosses, Helen, ed., Soviet Population Policy: Conflicts and Constraints (New York, 1981), 95–123;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Feshbach, Murray, The Soviet Population Policy Debate: Actors and Issues (Santa Monica, Calif., 1986), 25;Google Scholar Zakharov, Sergei V. and Ivanova, Elena I., “Fertility Decline and Recent Changes in Russia: On the Threshold of the Second Demographic Transition”, in DaVanzo, Julie, ed., Russia's Demographic “Crisis” (Santa Monica, Calif., 1996);Google Scholar Jones, Ellen and Grupp, Fred W., Modernization, Value Change and Fertility in the Soviet. Union (Cambridge, Eng., 1987), 275.Google Scholar The 1981 program called for enterprises to provide options for parttime work, flexible working hours, and work within the home, yet few such opportunities actually materialized.

24 Attwood, Lynne, The New Soviet Man and Woman: Sex Role Socialization in the USSR(London, 1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25 Zdravomyslova and Temkina, “Gosudarstvennoe konstruirovanie gendera v sovetskom obshchestve,”316.

26 Zhurzhenko, Tatiana, Gendernyerynki Ukrainy: Politicheskaia ekonomiia natsional'nogo stroitel'stva (Vilnius, 2008), 119.Google Scholar

27 Ibid. See also Rivkin-Fish, Women's Health in Post-Soviet Russia.

28 Field, Mark G., “The Health Crisis in the Former Soviet Union: A Report from the ‘Post-War’ Zone”, Social Science and Medicine 41, no. 11 (December 1995): 1469–;78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

29 Ovcharova, and Pishniak, , “Novye mery podderzhki materinstva i detstva”, 6; Vishnevskii, A. G., ed., Naselenie Rossii 2005: Trinadtsatyi ezhegodnyi demograficheskii doklad (Moscow, 2007), 126.Google Scholar For comparative figures, in 1995 Italy had a total fertility rate of 1.17, Japan 1.42, and Denmark 1.80. Zakharov, Sergei V., “Fertility, Nuptiality, and Family Planning in Russia: Problems and Prospects”, in Demko, George J., Ioffe, Grigory, and Zayonchkovskaya, Zhanna, eds., Population under Duress: The Geodemography of Post-Soviet Russia (Boulder, Colo., 1999), 44.Google Scholar Virulent debates have raged among Russian experts concerning the reasons for this decline in the birthrate. Many journalists and politicians cite the economic crisis, but liberal demographers argue that these patterns reflect Russians' increasing interest in individual autonomy. They see such value changes as positive evidence of Russia's European modernization. See, for example, Zakharov and Ivanova, “Fertility Decline and Recent Changes in Russia.” More research is needed, but both perspectives probably have some merit.

30 Khorev, Boris, “V chem ostrota demograficheskoi problemy v Rossii?” Rossiia i mir (Informalsionnyi ekspress biulleten' dlia deputatov Gosudarstvennoi Dumy), no. 135 (June 1997): 1–;45.Google Scholar

31 Bassom, Ann Marie, “The Russian Press: Coverage of Women's Health”, in Hesli, Vicki L. and Mills, Margaret H., eds., Medical Issues and Health Care Reform in Russia (Lewiston, N.Y., 1999), 233–;63;Google Scholar Lovtsova, Natalia I., “'Zdorovaia, blagopoluchnaia sem'ia—opora gosudarstva'? Gendernyi analiz semeinoi sotsial'noi politiki”, Zhurnal issledovanii sotsial'noi politiki 1, no. 3/4 (2003): 323–;38.Google Scholar

32 Ivanov, Serguey, Vichnevski, Anatolii, and Zakharov, Serguei, “Population Policy in Russia”, in Caselli, Graziella, Vallin, Jacques, and Wunsch, Guillaume, eds., Demography: Analysis and Synthesis (Paris, 2006), 407–;33.Google Scholar

33 Cook, “Oil Wealth and Welfare in the Russian Federation.”

34 Medvedeva, Irina and Shishova, Tat'iana, “Demograficheskaia voina protiv Rossii”, Nash sovremennik, no. 1 (2000).Google Scholar For a more detailed analysis, see Rivkin-Fish, Michele, “From ‘Demographic Crisis’ to a ‘Dying Nation’: The Politics of Language and Reproduction in Russia”, in Goscilo, Helena and Lanoux, Andrea, eds., Gender and National Identity in Twentieth-Century Russian Culture (DeKalb, 2006), 151–;73.Google Scholar

35 Nikolaev, Mikhail, “Schast'e materi—schast'e Rossii”, Meditsinskii vestnik, 23 November 2005, 1.Google Scholar

36 Zhurzhenko, Gendernye rynki Ukrainy, 120–;24.

37 Ibid., 122.

38 A particularly vivid example of the symbolism of such discourses can be seen in this quote: “Woman-mother, involved on a mass scale in work-based societal production, stopped giving her child maternal affection, which is so crucial in the first years of life, and in essence, stopped being a mother to him. She abandoned the familial hearth, which has from the beginning been her duty. This condemned the man to gradually take on women's roles: laundry, cleaning, and . . . taking ‘childcare leave,’ and as a result, the gradual devaluation of his importance, not only in the family, but in society.” Cited in Zhurzhenko, Gendernye rynki Ukrainy, 123.

39 It is ironic that neotraditionalists like Antonov have focused so much energy criticizing feminism, given that even the fledgling Russian feminist movement has not proposed radical critiques of the family.

40 Medvedeva, and Shishova, , “Demograficheskaia voina protiv Rossii” Antonov, Anatolii and Sorokin, S., Sud'ba sem'i v Rossii XXI veka: Razmyshleniia o semeinoi politike, o vozmozhnosti protivodeistuiia upadku sem'i i depopuliatsii (Moscow, 2000).Google Scholar

41 Yuval-Davis, Gender and Nation; Gal and Kligman, Politics of Gender after Socialism.

42 Putin, Vladimir, “Kakuiu Rossiiu my stroim”, Rossiiskaia gazeta, 11 July 2000, 1, 3.Google Scholar Reprinted in Current Digest of the Post-Soviet Press 52, no. 28 (2000): 4–;7 .

43 Pravitel'stvo Rossiiskoi Federatsii Rasporiazhenie, No. 1270–;r, “Kontseptsiia demograficheskogo razvitiia Rossiiskoi Federatsii na period do 2015 goda,” 24 September 2001, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/knigi/koncepciya/koncepciya.html (last accessed 3 June 2010).

44 “Zhdat' nel'zia: Partia ZHIZNI prizvala politicheskie i obshchestvennye sily ob“edinit'sia vokrug demograficheskoi politiki,” Literaturnaia gazeta, 5 October 2005, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2005/0217/gazeta01.php (last accessed 3June 2010).

45 Natal'ia Konygina, “Spiker Mironov predlagaet podelit'sia s novorozhdennvmi,” Izvestiia, 6 October 2005, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2005/0217/gazeta01.php (last accessed 3June 2010).

46 Elizarov, Valerii, “Kontseptsiia uvolena, da zdravstvuet KONTSEPTSIIA!” Demoscope Weekly, no. 309–;310 (12–;25 November 2007),Google Scholar at demoscope.ru/weekly/2007/0309/politOl.php (last accessed 3 June 2010). For a detailed evolution of a notion of national family politics, see Chernova, Zhanna V., Semeinaia politika v Evrope i Rossii: Gendernyi analiz (St. Petersburg, 2008), 209, 215–;16.Google Scholar

47 Teplova, Tatyana, “Welfare State Transformation, Childcare, and Women's Work in Russia”, Social Politics 14, no. 3 (Fall 2007): 284–;322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

48 Ibid., 298–;99.

49 Ibid., 299.

50 Chernova, Semeinaiapolitika vEvrope i Rossii, 215–;23.

51 Ibid., 210–;11.

52 Ibid., 198.

53 See, for example, Rotkirch, Temkina, and Zdravomyslova, “Who Helps the Degraded Housewife?”

54 Gal and Kligman, Politics of Gender after Socialism.

55 In this way, Russian pronatalist discourses construct “family values“ differently from the dominant rhetoric in the United States, where Christian conservatives advocate protecting the “free market” from labor movements and antidiscrimination legislation as a means of buttressing “family values.”They invoke faith-based personal decisions, rather than state regulation of market processes, as the solution for America's perceived crises. See Rebecca Dingo, "Securing the Nation: Neoliberalism's U.S. Family Values in a Transnational Gendered Economy, fournal of Women's History 16, no. 3 (Fall 2004): 173–;86.

56 Elena Gapova, “Vy rozhaite, vy rozhaite, vam zachtetsia,” Crani.ru (2006) at grani. ru/Society/m. 106127.html (last accessed 3June 2010).

57 Natalia Lovtsova, cited in Chernova, Semeinaia politika v Europe i Rossii, 214.

58 Denis Terent'ev, “Nedetskii capital: Pomogut li 250 tysiach rublei na vtorogo rebenka uvelichit' rozhdaemost',” Nevskoe vremia, 18 January 2007, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2007/0273/gazeta014.php (last accessed 3June 2010).

59 Aleksandr Kiiatkin, “Zolotye nashi deti: Vo skol'ko oboidetsia Rossii eksperiment po povysheniiu rozhdaemosti,”Smart Money, 12 November 2007, reprinted at www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2007/0309/gazeta02.php (last accessed 3 June 2010); T. M. and O. V. Siniavskaia, “Sotsial'no-ekonomicheskie factory rozhdaemosti v Rossii: Empiricheskie izmcrcniia i vyzovy sotsial'noi politike,”SPERO: Sotsial'naia politika: Ekspertiza, rekomendatsii, obzory, no. 5 (Fall-Winter 2006): 95.

60 Dmitrii Chislenko, “Subsidii dlia molodykh—eto zavualirovannaia kabala,”Krest'ianskaia Rossiia, 18 August 2003, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2003/0123/gazetaOl.php (last accessed 3June 2010).

61 Following such complaints, the age limit for this program was raised to 35 at the beginning of 2008. I am grateful to Jane Zavisca for pointing this out to me. See www.rost.ru/news/2008/01/151918_12389.shtml (last accessed 3June 2010).

62 Zakharov, Sergei V., “Demograficheskii analiz effekta mer semeinoi politiki v Rossii v 1980kh g.”, SPERO: Sotsial'naiapolitika: Ekspertiza, rekomendatsii, obzory, no. 5 (Fall-Winter 2006): 33.Google Scholar

63 See, for example, McDonald, “Gender Equity in Theories of Fertility Transition.”

64 Svetlana Aivazova, “Sem'ia: Mozhet li ona stat' anakhronizmom?” Ekho planely,9 February 2007, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2007/0277/gazeta025.php(last accessed 3 June 2010).

65 Ibid.

66 “Kapital'naia transformatsiia,”Ekspert Sibir', 22 January 2007, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2007/0273/gazeta014.php (last accessed 3June 2010).

67 Zdravomyslova, and Temkina, , “Gosudarstvennoe konstruirovanie gendera v sovetskom obshchestve Vymiraiushchiy vid”, Correspondent, no. 3 (31 January 2009),Google Scholar cited in Zhurzhenko, Tatiana, “Gender, Nation and Reproduction: Demographic Discourses and Politics in Ukraine after the Orange Revolution”, in Hankivsky, Olena and Salnykova, Anastasiya, eds., Gender, Politics and Society in Ukraine (Toronto, 2009).Google Scholar

68 McDonald, “Gender Equity in Theories of Fertility Transition.”

69 See Prikaz No. 624, “Ob utverzhdenii perechnia meditsinskikh pokazanii dlia iskusstvennogo preryvaniia beremennosti,”24 September 2007, cited in Aleksei Papyrin, “Chtoby abortov stalo men'she,”Meditsinskaia gazeta, 7 November 2007, reprinted at emoscope.ru/weekly/2007/0309/gazeta09.php (last accessed 3 June 2010); and Elena Kuznetsova and Kirill Marulin, “Rozhaiut vse,” Trud, 16 January 2008, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2008/0317/gazeta010.php (last accessed 3June 2010).

70 A. Ivanov, “Demografiiu popraviat, zapretiv aborty,” Kollektivnoe deistvie, 6 November 2007, at www.ikd.ru/node/4298 (last accessed 3June 2010).

71 One example of the use of pragmatic rather than ethical argumentation asserted: “If a woman has decided not to bear a child, she is not going to give birth. If medical abortion is prohibited, she will do it criminally.” This author, interestingly, invokes a different mode of ethical argumentation by holding men accountable for unwanted pregnancies: “the husband is guilty of the pregnancy. He actually could restrain his affection and avoid the need for abortion.” Ada Gorbacheva, “Vremia, nazad! Vmesto abortov legal'nykh— aborty kriminal'nye,”Nezavisimaia gazeta, 9 November 2007, reprinted at demoscope.ru/ weekly/2007/0309/gazeta08.php (last accessed 3June 2010).

72 Andrei Gudkov, “Bol'she novykh rozhdenii,”Vedomosti, 17January 2008, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2008/0317/gazeta09.php (last accessed 3 June 2010).

73 Pavel Korobov, “Deputaty ne khotiat preryvat' beremennost': Zhenshchine dlia aborta potrebuetsia spravka ot muzha,”Kommersant, no. 219 (3550), 23 November 2006, at www.kommersant.ru/doc.html?docld=724372 (last accessed 3June 2010).

74 Ol'ga Shkuratova, “Den'gi—nashe budushchee,” Kommersant-Reiting, 15 January 2007, reprinted at demoscope.ru/weekly/2007/0273/gazeta015.php (last accessed 3June 2010); lurii Petrovich Altuhov, “Genetiko-demograficheskii krizis v sovremennoi Rossii, doklad na rozhdestvenskikh chteniiakh 2002 goda,”at ethnocid.netda.ru/analitika/altuhov.htm (last accessed 3June 2010).

75 Rotkirch, Temkina, and Zdravomyslova, “Who Helps the Degraded Housewife?“