The im/mobilities of ‘sometimes-migrating’ for abortion: Ireland to Great Britain

Abstract

This paper furthers the concept of im/mobilities through an investigation of the reproductive mobilities of women migrating for abortion from Ireland (north and south) to Great Britain. Where more often the focus of reproductive mobilities concerns the movement of people and matter in order to reproduce, there is less (although some) attention to movement aligned with the prevention of reproduction. We consider the variegated im/mobilities of conception not brought to birth, in the frictional movement of people, things, ideologies and imaginations in order to develop understandings of the variegated interplay of mobility and immobility. In adopting a critical mobilities perspective, we draw from the interface of scholarship in mobilities and migration studies. Hence, underlying this exploration is Hui's (2016) concept of the 'sometimes-migrant', used to challenge broader conceptualisations of 'migrants' as 'exceptional', binary oppositions between mobility and immobility, and open transdisciplinary dialogue between scholarship in migration and mobilities. We adopt Hui's call to focus on different incarnations of the 'sometimes-migrant' in the form of women travelling temporarily across national borders of varying porosity in order to seek care that is not available in their own country. Intersections of migration, mobilities and cultural history reveal the ways abortions involving women from Ireland are immobilised through geopolitical and cultural practices at local and global scales. In furthering understandings of women's reproductive im/mobilities we challenge the notion of the 'abortion tourist' and illustrate the ways in which 'sometimes-migrants' become constructed according to historical and spatial discourses.

Abortion mobilities

“…Both mobility and immobility are ‘intimately’ connected with abortion access (Side, 2020, p. 16). Immobilities are ‘not only an absence of movement, but the constraining of movement in particular ways–both corporeally and emotionally’ that take place within a ‘complex landscape’ of abortion care (Murray & Khan, 2020, p. 163). As Side explains, ‘[l]egislation links mobility, spatiality and temporality in ways that jeopardise access, retain risk and create categories of vulnerability and criminalisation’ (Side, 2020, p. 22).…”

“…An abortion (im)mobilities perspective enables consideration of these issues, particularly as they relate to race, class, and other social categories, as discussed below. Importantly, however, immobilities can also produce resistance through the enaction of mobility freedoms (Murray & Khan, 2020). An abortion mobilities framework must pay attention to both movement and its lack to fully understand the multi‐dimensional forces shaping abortion access.…”

“…The notion of ‘abortion tourism’ has been a particular subject of discussion. Several abortion scholars consider the term problematic for its neoliberal connotations of choice and freedom that do not align with the reality of abortion law or access in many places (Murray & Khan, 2020). They emphasise that abortion travel is often not a choice but a necessity given the material conditions of one's society.…”

Viapolitics and the emancipatory possibilities of abortion mobilities

“…As the earlier examples showed, travel can be a humiliating and traumatising experience and disproportionately impacts the poorest and most vulnerable. In abortion scholarship, immobility can be understood as the constraining or restriction of movement ( Murray and Khan 2020 ), but fixity can also be the goal so that women need not travel at all ( Side 2020 ). Mobility is not always synchronized with freedom.…”

“…Mobilities and reproduction have been ‘mostly disparate bodies of scholarship’ ( Speier, Lozanski, and Frohlick 2020 , 108) even though ‘[m]obilities theory can offer many new insights into reproduction, while feminist and critical theories of reproduction might allow for new insights into theorizing (im)mobilities’ ( Sheller 2020 , 188). The majority of scholarship on reproductive mobility has focused on transnational travel for in vitro fertilization ( Bergmann 2011 ) and surrogacy ( Deomampo 2013 ).…”