The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National Congress
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2023 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Sociedade em Debate (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://revistas.ucpel.edu.br/rsd/article/view/3332 |
Resumo: | For many women in the world sterilization is the most appropriate contraceptive method. It can, though, be used as a control instrument when reproductive rights are not widely guaranteed. This paper analyzes the Bills at the Brazilian National Congress that propose amendments to the Family Planning Law regarding voluntary sterilization in an attempt to demonstrate that these Bills would imply restriction of the reproductive cycle of women. Documentary research was utilized in the texts of 15 bills in progress until 2020. It was verified that neo-Malthusian philosophy predominates among legislators and that the Bills are evidence of the advance of conservatism in the Brazilian National Congress. The legislators institutionalize, through the Bills, the oppression on women by offering easy access to a definitive procedure, as they know that women opt for surgery to contain their reproductive cycle in a context of absence of social policies and frailty of reproductive rights. |
id |
UCPEL-2_adc05be7f90d88a85173a69b678940b3 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:www.rle.ucpel.tche.br:article/3332 |
network_acronym_str |
UCPEL-2 |
network_name_str |
Sociedade em Debate (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National CongressO debate sobre a esterilização feminina no Congresso Nacional BrasileiroWomen’s Reproductive Rights. Family Planning. Social Policy.Women’s Reproductive RightsFamily PlanningSocial PolicyFor many women in the world sterilization is the most appropriate contraceptive method. It can, though, be used as a control instrument when reproductive rights are not widely guaranteed. This paper analyzes the Bills at the Brazilian National Congress that propose amendments to the Family Planning Law regarding voluntary sterilization in an attempt to demonstrate that these Bills would imply restriction of the reproductive cycle of women. Documentary research was utilized in the texts of 15 bills in progress until 2020. It was verified that neo-Malthusian philosophy predominates among legislators and that the Bills are evidence of the advance of conservatism in the Brazilian National Congress. The legislators institutionalize, through the Bills, the oppression on women by offering easy access to a definitive procedure, as they know that women opt for surgery to contain their reproductive cycle in a context of absence of social policies and frailty of reproductive rights.Para muitas mulheres no mundo, a esterilização é o método contraceptivo mais apropriado. No entanto, este método pode ser usado como um instrumento de controle quando os direitos reprodutivos não são amplamente garantidos. Este artigo analisa os Projetos de Lei do Congresso Nacional que propõem emendas à Lei do Planejamento Familiar em relação à esterilização na tentativa de demonstrar que estas propostas implicam na restrição do ciclo reprodutivo das mulheres. A pesquisa documental foi utilizada para analisar 15 projetos de lei que tramitavam até 2020. Foi verificado que a filosofia neomalthusiana predomina entre os legisladores e que os projetos são evidências do avanço do conservadorismo no Congresso Nacional brasileiro. Os legisladores institucionalizam, por meio das suas propostas, a opressão sobre a mulher, oferecendo fácil acesso a um procedimento definitivo, pois sabem que a mulher opta pela cirurgia para conter seu ciclo reprodutivo num contexto de ausência de políticas sociais e de fragilidade dos direitos reprodutivos.PPG em Política Social e Direitos Humanos2023-04-30info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.ucpel.edu.br/rsd/article/view/333210.47208/sd.v29i1.3332Sociedade em Debate; Vol. 29 No. 1 (2023): Sociedade em Debate; 90-109Sociedade em Debate; Vol. 29 Núm. 1 (2023): Sociedade em Debate; 90-109Sociedade em Debate; v. 29 n. 1 (2023): Sociedade em Debate; 90-1092317-02041414-986910.47208/sd.v29i1reponame:Sociedade em Debate (Online)instname:Universidade Católica de Pelotas (UCPEL)instacron:UCPELenghttps://revistas.ucpel.edu.br/rsd/article/view/3332/1947Copyright (c) 2023 Leila Marchezi Tavares Menandro, Hazel Barretthttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMarchezi Tavares Menandro, LeilaBarrett, Hazel2023-04-30T21:59:22Zoai:www.rle.ucpel.tche.br:article/3332Revistahttps://revistas.ucpel.edu.br/index.php/rsdPUBhttps://revistas.ucpel.edu.br/index.php/rsd/oaiveramrn@gmail.com||revista@phoenix.ucpel.tche.br2317-02041414-9869opendoar:2023-04-30T21:59:22Sociedade em Debate (Online) - Universidade Católica de Pelotas (UCPEL)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National Congress O debate sobre a esterilização feminina no Congresso Nacional Brasileiro |
title |
The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National Congress |
spellingShingle |
The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National Congress Marchezi Tavares Menandro, Leila Women’s Reproductive Rights. Family Planning. Social Policy. Women’s Reproductive Rights Family Planning Social Policy |
title_short |
The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National Congress |
title_full |
The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National Congress |
title_fullStr |
The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National Congress |
title_full_unstemmed |
The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National Congress |
title_sort |
The debate concerning female sterilization in the Brazilian National Congress |
author |
Marchezi Tavares Menandro, Leila |
author_facet |
Marchezi Tavares Menandro, Leila Barrett, Hazel |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Barrett, Hazel |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Marchezi Tavares Menandro, Leila Barrett, Hazel |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Women’s Reproductive Rights. Family Planning. Social Policy. Women’s Reproductive Rights Family Planning Social Policy |
topic |
Women’s Reproductive Rights. Family Planning. Social Policy. Women’s Reproductive Rights Family Planning Social Policy |
description |
For many women in the world sterilization is the most appropriate contraceptive method. It can, though, be used as a control instrument when reproductive rights are not widely guaranteed. This paper analyzes the Bills at the Brazilian National Congress that propose amendments to the Family Planning Law regarding voluntary sterilization in an attempt to demonstrate that these Bills would imply restriction of the reproductive cycle of women. Documentary research was utilized in the texts of 15 bills in progress until 2020. It was verified that neo-Malthusian philosophy predominates among legislators and that the Bills are evidence of the advance of conservatism in the Brazilian National Congress. The legislators institutionalize, through the Bills, the oppression on women by offering easy access to a definitive procedure, as they know that women opt for surgery to contain their reproductive cycle in a context of absence of social policies and frailty of reproductive rights. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-04-30 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ucpel.edu.br/rsd/article/view/3332 10.47208/sd.v29i1.3332 |
url |
https://revistas.ucpel.edu.br/rsd/article/view/3332 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.47208/sd.v29i1.3332 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ucpel.edu.br/rsd/article/view/3332/1947 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2023 Leila Marchezi Tavares Menandro, Hazel Barrett https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2023 Leila Marchezi Tavares Menandro, Hazel Barrett https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
PPG em Política Social e Direitos Humanos |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
PPG em Política Social e Direitos Humanos |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade em Debate; Vol. 29 No. 1 (2023): Sociedade em Debate; 90-109 Sociedade em Debate; Vol. 29 Núm. 1 (2023): Sociedade em Debate; 90-109 Sociedade em Debate; v. 29 n. 1 (2023): Sociedade em Debate; 90-109 2317-0204 1414-9869 10.47208/sd.v29i1 reponame:Sociedade em Debate (Online) instname:Universidade Católica de Pelotas (UCPEL) instacron:UCPEL |
instname_str |
Universidade Católica de Pelotas (UCPEL) |
instacron_str |
UCPEL |
institution |
UCPEL |
reponame_str |
Sociedade em Debate (Online) |
collection |
Sociedade em Debate (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade em Debate (Online) - Universidade Católica de Pelotas (UCPEL) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
veramrn@gmail.com||revista@phoenix.ucpel.tche.br |
_version_ |
1799304255486558208 |