Brief by FRF Strategic Communication Center
Ban on abortions in private clinics and fines for ‘inducing’ them in Russian regions, federal initiatives to restrict the possibility of terminating pregnancy, and a heated societal debate— limitations on the right to abortion have been actively promoted in Russian society by state media and political actors since 2023. Concurrently, authorities have begun emphasizing themes of family support and the protection of traditional values.
The discussion about the abortion ban has sparked a wide debate and division within society. In several regions, starting from the summer, laws prohibiting the encouragement of pregnancy termination were passed: in Mordovia, Kaliningrad, and Tver Oblasts. Later, private clinics in several regions began refusing to provide abortion services. Deputy Speaker of the State Duma, Anna Kuznetsova, mentioned the exploration of a similar idea at the federal level, explaining that since the following year is declared by Putin a year of the family, ‘family values, protecting our children, and protecting our families will become a priority’.
The Russian Orthodox Church has joined the process: as reported by the BBC Russian Service, Patriarch Kirill, in a letter to the Speaker of the State Duma Vyacheslav Volodin, requested legislative measures to prohibit abortions in private clinics. Following this, the Duma’s relevant committee sent letters to regions to gather opinions on this matter. Additionally, the Patriarch asked for this initiative to be reviewed by the Committee on Security and Anti-Corruption rather than the Healthcare Committee due to the issue’s significance.
At this stage, Vladimir Putin also expressed interest, stating in a meeting with new members of the Public Chamber that the issue of abortions is acute: ‘The question is: what to do about it? Prohibit the sale of pregnancy termination drugs, or improve the socio-economic situation in the country, raise the level of welfare, real wages, social services, and support young families in acquiring housing?’.
The November survey by the Public Opinion Foundation showed an increase in support for the idea of a complete abortion ban following the start of an active information campaign. However, it noted that opponents of restrictions outnumbered supporters threefold.
Unable to garner support for this idea, both political actors and official media began softening their rhetoric in favor of restrictions. For instance, on December 4th, Valentina Matviyenko, the Speaker of the Federation Council, stated, «No prohibitions, no campaigning, no pressure, no criminalization of legislation in this sphere can solve this problem… It is necessary now to reduce the rhetoric, move this discussion into the realm of common sense, and continue painstaking professional work that would exclude mistakes and unconsidered proposals, avoiding societal alarm.» Matviyenko’s stance was echoed by official propaganda outlets. On the same day, host Olga Skabeeva expressed direct support for Matviyenko’s position, and on December 5th, RT’s head, Margarita Simonyan, said, «Banning abortions will lead to underground abortions, resulting in maternal deaths, infections, and infertility. This measure will not save ‘our long- suffering’ demographics.»
After Matviyenko’s statement, the authorities began criticizing «radical» solutions. This is evident in the case of the controversial State Duma deputy Yevgeny Fyodorov, who proposed reinstating the «tax on childlessness» that existed in the USSR to encourage women to have more children.
Fyodorov’s idea faced criticism from both deputies of the «parliamentary opposition» (Communist Party and «New People») and the United Russia member Vladimir Milonov, who has long advocated for «traditional values.»
As a result, anonymous pro-Kremlin Telegram channels began circulating messages suggesting that the Kremlin believed society was tired of prohibitions, and the presidential administration demanded that deputies «not agitate the people» with their initiatives ahead of the elections.
An anonymous channel called «Secret Chancellery» posted about this, which then spread to other channels, including, allegedly, those close to the president’s administration like BRIEF and the channel of journalist Yekaterina Vinokurova.
Vladimir Putin announced his intention to run for the Russian presidency on December 8th.
The first major event in his campaign was an hours-long broadcast where the president answered questions from citizens and journalists. This followed the format of the usual «direct line» but was termed «Results of the Year» this time. Until December 14th, Vladimir Putin had not responded to questions from Russians for two years, starting from the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Among the 67 questions the president addressed was one concerning abortions. In his speech, Putin emphasized improving conditions in women’s clinics and maternity departments, urging increased support for families with children.
He likened the idea of restrictions to the anti-alcohol campaigns of the late ’80s, which led «to the consumption of surrogates, increased moonshine production, and increased casualties from poisonings.» Moreover, Putin publicly distanced himself from the abortion ban initiative, stating that the Russian Orthodox Church primarily supported this idea. He underscored that it was natural for the Church, as a guardian of traditional values, but authorities needed to consider «other aspects»—specifically, women’s rights.
Despite the subtle adjustment in the state’s stance, Patriarch Kirill succeeded in introducing a bill to the lower house of parliament regarding abortion restrictions in private clinics. However, it was not introduced by the State Duma deputies but by the legislative assembly of the Nizhny Novgorod region.
This occurred on December 13, a day before Vladimir Putin’s address. Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin sent the bill for preliminary consideration to the health committee (despite the patriarch’s request to send it to the security committee). Subsequently, on December 18, Vedomosti published an article referring to the response from the healthcare committee to Vyacheslav Volodin stating the committee supports citizens’ right to choose their doctor and clinic. In essence, the committee was against limiting abortions in private clinics.
However, just a few hours later, there were additions to the article. Telegram channel «Pod’yom» published a post stating that the letter reflected not the committee’s position but that of individual members. Deputy Chair Leonid Ogul clarified that he hadn’t even seen the letter because «the question wasn’t discussed in the committee.» In a comment to Ksenia Sobchak’s Telegram channel «Krovavaya Barinya,» Ogul added that although personally he and many other members were against it, their personal opinions shouldn’t be taken as the committee’s position.
This indicates that the decision to touch on restricting abortion rights in the near future was made not to upset both the majority opposed and the minority in favor of this idea. Therefore, the likelihood of adopting restrictive measures during the election campaign can be assessed as minimal due to societal polarization. However, the authorities evidently keep open the possibility of revisiting this issue at a more opportune time.