‘How Did You Get in There and Make the Law Work?’ Feminist Activism, Doctors and Abortion Law: The Occupation of an Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, I examine the aftermath of Italy's 1978 abortion law (Law 194/1978) and the following feminist occupation of a Rome hospital, revealing a little-known chapter in feminist history. The legislation marked a pivotal moment by partly legalising abortion access, overturning draconian laws from the Fascist era. The focus on the 3-month occupation illuminates how social movements actively shaped, and were shaped by, the implementation of the law. Drawing on overlooked archival materials and original interviews with feminist abortion campaigners, I uncover unique dynamics between feminist activists, medical professionals, and abortion law. I contend that this historical event not only diversifies our understanding of social movements’ roles in legal changes but also highlights the exceptional case of a public hospital serving as a platform for transmitting feminist practices and knowledge to medical professionals. Ultimately, I argue for the crucial role of feminist history in advancing socio–legal scholarship.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".