Authors

Discussion

While late-Soviet abortion legislation was likely the most liberal in world history, women’s reproductive autonomy was limited by both normative prescriptions and the material realities of the late-socialist healthcare system. The former related to late-Soviet pronatalism and anti-abortion propaganda, among others, while the latter was linked to material shortages and to the power dynamics between Soviet healthcare professionals and women patients. This paper argues that it was the combination of these factors that led to the persistence of gynecological and obstetric violence and to women’s physical and psychological suffering, which remained largely taboo. However, women found ways to exercise agency in order to overcome the rigidity of the system and secure more humane care, especially by relying on the system of blat. In addition to these adaptive strategies, it was through public exposure of the problem - first in samizdat and tamizdat writings and then in the popular press during glasnost - that women denounced abusive practices and raised their voices, calling for what can be termed reproductive dignity. The paper concludes with insights into the marketization of healthcare as a possible solution to women’s maltreatment in medical institutions during perestroika and in post-Soviet Russia, highlighting its limitations and the persistence of this problem.