Pro-choice andpro-life are terms of self-identification used by the two sides of theabortion debate: those who support access to abortion, and those whoseek to restrict it, respectively. They are generally consideredloaded language, since each side frames their position in terms of inherentlypositive qualities (and thus positions their opponents as "anti-choice" or "anti-life"). For this reason, more neutral or descriptive alternatives are sometimes preferred, for example by describing groups or individuals as supporters or opponents of abortion or abortion rights.
The termpro-life began to be used by opponents oflegal abortion around the early 1970s, born from the related term "right to life". The termpro-choice (or "right to choose") was coined in response by abortion rights advocates shortly after.
The earliest use of the termpro-life cited by theOxford English Dictionary is in the 1960 bookSummerhill: A Radical Approach to Child Rearing by educatorA. S. Neill, though Neill uses it in a more general sense not specific to abortion:
"No pro-life parent or teacher would ever strike a child. No pro-life citizen would tolerate our penal code, our hangings, our punishment of homosexuals, our attitude toward bastardy."[1][2]
The earliest citation for an abortion-specific sense of the term is a 1971 reference in theLos Angeles Times to "pro-life, anti-abortion educational programs".[2]
The adjectivepro-life seems to derive from earlier constructions involving the wordlife used by opponents of legal abortion, particularly the phrase "right to life". For example, anti-abortion organizations founded in the late 1960s included the Right to Life League andMinnesota Citizens Concerned for Life. However, in early usage, prior to the 1973 Supreme Court caseRoe v. Wade, the "pro-life" or "right to life" position more commonly encompassed progressive views such as opposition to war and the death penalty in addition to opposition to abortion.[1] New York Times language columnistWilliam Safire creditsNellie Gray with popularizingpro-life as a shortened form of the "right to life" slogan.[3] Gray founded the annualMarch for Life in Washington in 1974.
.jpg)
The termpro-choice entered currency afterpro-life and was coined by those who supported legal abortion as a response to the success of thepro-life branding.[1][4] The first use of the term cited by theOxford English Dictionary is in a 1969 issue of the California daily newspaper theOxnard Press-Courier, which referred to "Pro-choice and anti-abortion activists... headed to the Women's Clinic."[5] AuthorsLinda Greenhouse andReva B. Siegel identify a 1972 memo by Jimmye Kimmey, executive director of theAssociation for the Study of Abortion, as the genesis of the subsequent widespread adoption of thepro-choice label. In the memo, Kimmey identifies "the need to find a phrase to counter the Right to Life slogan", and suggests "Freedom of Conscience" and "Right to Choose" as possibilities, with a preference for the latter because of its brevity and focus on action rather than the "internal matter" of conscience.[1][6] William Safire suggests the slogan may have drawn influence from the use of "Freedom of Choice" as an anti-integration slogan in the previous decade.[3]
In the years beforepro-choice became widely adopted, the qualifierpro-abortion was commonly used by those advocating for legal abortion. For example, a representative ofPlanned Parenthood referred to "pro-abortion" legislation in a 1975 statement toThe Wall Street Journal. When abortion was legalized in the United States, the term fell out of fashion, seen as distracting or inaccurate because many people support legal access to abortion without arguing that it is the right choice.[7][8]
Those who identify as pro-choice generally reject the framing of the termpro-life and vice-versa. The terms are commonly interpreted as derogating the other side of the debate by implying that they are either "anti-choice" or "anti-life" (or "pro-death").[9][1][3] The decision to brand the movements in positive rather than negative terms has been compared to the earlier use of the phrase"right-to-work" instead of "anti-union".[3]
Planned Parenthood announced in 2013 that it would no longer use the labelpro-choice. The organization suggested that the wordchoice might have an undesirably "frivolous" connotation, and that polling suggested that the binary labelspro-choice andpro-life failed to capture the nuanced views of Americans toward abortion. For example, one poll sponsored by the organization showed that 35% of voters who identified as pro-life did not believeRoe v. Wade should be overturned. Another survey found that 12% of respondents identified with both the labelspro-choice andpro-life simultaneously.[10] Planned Parenthood deliberately declined to propose a replacement term.[10][7]
On oneMothers' Day, US pastor-turned-senatorRaphael Gamaliel Warnock argued that being 'anti-abortion' and being 'pro-life' are not synonymous.[11]
An article in theNational Catholic Reporter has asserted that climate change is the "No. 1 pro-life issue" facing the Catholic Church today.[12]
Many press style guides, including those used byNPR and theAssociated Press,[13] advise against using the termspro-choice andpro-life, except in cases where those terms occur in the name of an organization or in a quote. NPR's policy recommends alternative constructions such as "abortion rights supporters" and "abortion rights opponents". It permits the qualifier "anti-abortion", but not "pro-abortion rights".[13] The style guide ofThe Guardian recommends the terms "anti-abortion" (rather than "pro-life") and "pro-choice" (rather than "pro-abortion").[14]