by Rebecca Oas, C-Fam
INTRODUCTION
The term “reproductive violence” has recently started appearing in the reports of UN agencies and human rights experts, and has been proposed for inclusion in negotiated resolutions. Its proponents argue that it draws attention to specific harmful practices like forced abortion and sterilization or even gestational surrogacy. At the same time, those seeking to define the term also use it to condemn abortion restrictions, framing forced abortion and denial of abortion as equally violent acts. Because of this, the term “reproductive violence” should be avoided in UN policy. This Definitions article explains the origins of the term and how it is already being used in the UN system to promote abortion and frame the pro-life position as a source of violence.
A new “reproductive” buzzword
In recent months, there has been a concerted push to introduce the phrase “reproductive violence” into United Nations resolutions. After initially appearing in some reports from UN agencies and human rights experts, it was included in a Human Rights Council resolution in summer 2026. Its appearance in the resolution, which discussed the rights of women and girls in humanitarian situations, was applauded by the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF).[1] An article in Ms. Magazine immediately proposed how it could be used to attack abortion restrictions in the U.S.[2]
Clearly, this novel language was received as a win by pro-abortion activists, but if it was truly so advantageous to them, why did it not receive more pushback by pro-life governments at the Human Rights Council? This article will attempt to answer this question—and make the case why it should be kept out of further documents at the Human Rights Council and especially at the General Assembly. But first, it is important to understand this new phrase’s lineage.