Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40313360›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in global women's health2025

Contested narratives: a qualitative analysis of abortion testimonies in Louisiana legislature.

Martha Silva, Jeni Stolow, Micki Burdick, Amy Mercieca

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in global women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Martha Silva *Department of International Health and Sustainable Development, Celia Scott Weatherhead School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Jeni Stolow *Department of Social, Behavioral and Population Sciences, Celia Scott Weatherhead School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Micki BurdickDepartment of Women and Gender Studies, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, United States.
Amy MerciecaDepartment of Social, Behavioral and Population Sciences, Celia Scott Weatherhead School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Following the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in Methods: We conducted a conventional qualitative content analysis utilizing a rhetorical lens, using testimony transcripts from the May 10, 2023, Louisiana Administration of Criminal Justice Committee hearing. An iterative coding approach allowed us to categorize salient themes, language patterns, speaker characteristics, emotional tones, and rhetorical strategies. Demographic characteristics were ascribed to speakers based on perceived gender and race when not self-identified. Results: Testimony analysis revealed four primary themes: (1) conflicting representations of abortion, (2) religion's role in shaping discourse, (3) humanization of fetuses vs. pregnant individuals, and (4) debate over available resources for survivors and children. Abortion is represented as being traumatic, adding to the trauma caused by sexual violence, while representing childbearing as healing from trauma. Being conceived as a result of sexual violence is used as an identity marker worthy of protection. Religious rhetoric permeates testimony both in support and in opposition to abortion exceptions, making a "pro-life" stance the starting point for debate. Lastly, we find evidence of dehumanization of survivors' and others' experience. Conclusions: The testimonies around HB346 expose deeply polarized discourse that reflects moral, religious, and ethical conflicts, as well as mismatched conversations that are unlikely to persuade opposing sides. Addressing these dissonant narratives requires nuanced advocacy strategies and resources to support effective testimony.

Indexed as

abortiondiscourselegislationreproductive healthsexual violence

Identifiers

PMID40313360
PMCPMC12043522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.