Abstract
The study aimed to identify the arguments of the persuasion strategy of the speeches presented at the public hearing on the Action Against the Violation of Constitutional Fundamental Rights -ADPF 442, held in 2018, whose purpose was to discuss the voluntary interruption of pregnancy until the 12th week. To this end, a qualitative, analytical-descriptive, and documentary research was carried out. The object of analysis was the video recording of the hearing available on the YouTube platform, and in minutes drawn up by the STF, both of which are public. Based on a discourse analysis, the arguments used in the persuasion strategy were identified, which were systematized into four categories of arguments for each of the two identified groups: the group for and the group against the decriminalization of abortion. The first three categories, Mental Health, Law and Public Health, even with differences in the way of presenting the argument, are repeated in both groups. However, the fourth category, Assumptions, differed. In the group for the decriminalization of abortion, it was presented as Philosophical and Scientific Assumptions, whereas the group against, as Moral Assumptions. Finally, the defense of women’s mental health was the main argument in a way of humanizing the suffering experienced by those who wish to have an abortion and do not find the support of the State to guarantee their dignity, citizenship, and effective equality, constitutionally guaranteed.
Keywords:
Abortion; Mental Health; Decriminalization; ADPF 442