Germany recently passed incremental liberalisations to its abortion law. Yet access to abortion remains under threat, and far-right and conservative forces blocked its partial legalisation. Lisa Brünig explains how these processes are symptomatic of broader democratic backsliding
In 2022, America's top court overturned the 1973 ruling guaranteeing women the right to abortion. In Poland, despite the efforts of Donald Tusk's Civic Coalition, abortion is permitted only in exceptional circumstances.
Germany's government, by contrast, recently took steps to liberalise the country's abortion laws. In 2022, it abolished paragraph 219a, which prohibited doctors and clinics stating on their websites that they provided abortions. In 2024, Germany also criminalised harassment outside clinics and counselling centres. Despite these incremental legal changes, however, abortion remains criminalised under Germany's Penal Code, and structural barriers to abortion care persist.
In late 2024, a coalition of civil society organisations, legal scholars, and progressive MPs sought to change this. Their proposed Bill – the first legislative draft for the legalisation of abortions in Germany since 1993 – called for the partial legalisation of abortion. The Bill made abortion legal within the first twelve weeks of pregnancy. It also enabled health insurance coverage and, though it retained mandatory counselling for people seeking a termination, the Bill abolished the mandatory waiting period.
The Bill was the result of years of feminist advocacy, drawing on recommendations by the government’s Commission on Reproductive Self-Determination and Reproductive Medicine. Yet, despite growing public support and a favourable parliamentary majority, the Bill never reached a parliamentary vote. This failure, I believe, is not mere bureaucratic coincidence. Rather, it is a case of democratic backsliding, dismantling democratic and reproductive rights.
After the first parliamentary hearing, it remained unclear whether the legislative draft would be referred to the Legal Affairs Committee. Right before the February 2025 public hearing, CDU/CSU and FDP announced they would not refer the bill back for a parliamentary vote. Although more than 300 MPs supported the draft, these procedural delays prevented a vote before the early end of the legislative period. The CDU/CSU-SPD-FDP coalition collapsed in November 2024 with new elections following in February 2025. This exemplifies how politicians had hijacked democratic processes to dismantle reproductive rights and maintain patriarchal control over reproductive bodies.
Similar patterns appeared elsewhere. In the US, myriad democratic dysfunctions, including assaults on science-based policymaking, contributed to the overturning of Roe vs. Wade. As feminist movements challenge the state's repronormative foundations, Christian-fundamentalist and conservative movements increasingly contest the legitimacy of feminist knowledge, and science itself.
Debates over scientific standards and knowledge production in the realms of abortion law have become battlegrounds, much like antifeminist attacks on gender studies
In Germany, a similar dynamic emerged around the ELSA research project, a large-scale Ministry of Health-commissioned study on the experiences of unintentionally pregnant people. In the public hearing, speakers from the self-proclaimed 'pro-life' movement dismissed the study as politically motivated. Even more concerning, experts invited by the CDU/CSU – some medical professionals themselves – denied there were gaps in care, attacked the study’s methodology, and referred to their own 'research'. A closer look at this research reveals a small circle of researchers repeatedly citing themselves.
Some such experts have spoken at events organised by Action Right to Life for All, one of Germany’s oldest anti-choice organisations. This raises questions about scientific standards, authority, and the struggle over who the state recognises as a legitimate expert – echoing histories of medical control over reproductive bodies.
Successes in the fight for reproductive rights, along with empirical evidence on barriers to care, threaten patriarchal, cis-heteronormative, and repronormative power relations. But counter-movements adapt. Debates over scientific standards and knowledge production have become battlegrounds, much like antifeminist attacks on gender studies.
Germany’s reproductive politics reveal how anti-feminist actors and parties like Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) have successfully shifted public discourse. They attack reproductive rights through the language of 'societal division', 'scientific objectivity' and 'demographic decline'. As Başak Akkan and Tuğçe Erçetin argue in this series, 'familyism' is at the core of authoritarian responses to changing societal gender order. The AfD defines abortion as murder, and frames reproduction as a matter of protecting the white, heterosexual nation. The party has even invited 'pro-life' activists as experts into parliament.
As the parliamentary arm of the anti-choice movement, AfD imports conspiracist, racist, and trans-hostile elements into abortion debates
As the parliamentary arm of the anti-choice movement, AfD imports conspiracist, racist, and trans-hostile elements into abortion debates. The party weaponises 'freedom of speech' and 'women’s rights' to legitimise the restriction of reproductive rights. Through this strategy of discursive mainstreaming, far-right issues are increasingly normalised. Factions of the CDU/CSU started endorsing these issues, too, moving the party further to the right.
As AfD gains seats in more regional parliaments, the risks of reproductive backsliding – including the defunding of counselling centres and the spread of disinformation – increase. Timely legalisation of abortion in Germany is thus unlikely.
In 2024, an amendment to Germany’s Pregnancy Conflict Act criminalised certain forms of 'sidewalk harassment' outside clinics. Despite this, threats to counselling centres and physicians persist. The Administrative Court in Regensburg even declared new regulations mandating minimum distances to clinics and counselling centres inadmissible.
All this demonstrates the urgent need to strengthen reproductive rights at the local level. Improvement would include supporting counselling centres, expanding sex education, funding activist networks, disseminating accessible, multilingual information, and destigmatising abortion through everyday visibility.
Certain forms of 'sidewalk harassment' outside abortion clinics are now criminalised in Germany. Despite this, threats persist
Abortion rights remain central to German feminist pro-choice movements. Yet structural privilege confers easier access to abortion, and marginalised groups experience disproportionate barriers to abortion access. Self-reflection and intergenerational solidarity are therefore vital to forge the alliances that will secure the conditions necessary for reproductive justice. Beyond formal legalisation, discussions must address abortion access in relation to access to pre-natal care, maternal mortality, child poverty, racism, and ableism in healthcare. Also on the agenda should be the financing for contraceptives, abortion, and childcare.
Studying democratic erosion through the lens of reproductive justice is a fruitful research angle. As this article shows, it is not just authoritarian laws that erode reproductive rights, but the normalisation of anti-feminist discourse. To safeguard autonomy, we must create robust local, national, and transnational solidarity networks.
Recent events in Germany reveal the fragility of 'progress'. Defending abortion rights today means defending democracy itself.
No.38 in a Loop series on 🌈 Gendering Democracy
