Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41766604›Full record

ArticleSexual and reproductive health matters2025

The "architecture of distancing": a mode of abortion governance illustrated by the Italian case.

Debra Lanfranconi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sexual and reproductive health matters, 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

1 author.

Debra LanfranconiPhD candidate, Swiss Graduate School of Public Administration (IDHEAP), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. Correspondence: debra.lanfranconi@unil.ch.ORCID 0009-0006-6472-0404

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This commentary introduces the concept of an "architecture of distancing" to describe a mode of reproductive governance that preserves the legal recognition of abortion while constraining the conditions necessary for exercising this right. Using Italy as a paradigmatic case, it illustrates how the law has, from its inception, embedded mechanisms that maintain formal legality yet distance individuals from access - through strict procedural requirements, institutionalised conscientious objection, and the integration of anti-abortion groups into public services. The Italian case demonstrates that obstacles to abortion access are often not mere implementation failures, but features built within even ostensibly liberal legal frameworks, thereby helping illuminate contexts in which abortion is "legal but inaccessible". More broadly, the concept offers a lens for capturing contemporary forms of reproductive governance that restrict without prohibiting. As there is no architecture without architects, the architecture of distancing draws attention to the political, institutional, and social arrangements that sustain these dynamics and underscores the importance of prioritising the material realisation of reproductive rights over their symbolic recognition.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedAbortion, LegalHealth Services AccessibilityReproductive RightsFemaleHumansItalyPregnancyabortion accessabortion rightsarchitecture of distancingconscientious objectionItalyLaw 194/78reproductive governance

Identifiers

PMID41766604
PMCPMC13037148

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.