The design of spaces for reproductive healthcare is a critical issue in contemporary architecture, particularly in the context of women’s birthing and abortion services. Traditional healthcare facilities are often designed from a clinical and standardized perspective that fails to address the emotional, psychological, and social dimensions of reproductive healthcare. Such spaces frequently perpetuate a sense of alienation, dehumanization, and powerlessness, which can undermine the very autonomy they are meant to support. This issue demands a new approach to architecture—one that prioritizes privacy, dignity, choice, and empowerment for women navigating complex reproductive decisions. This thesis proposes a holistic, patient-centered architectural model for a women’s clinic and birthing center that integrates both birth and abortion services. It aims to foster environments that respect women’s reproductive autonomy while addressing the need for spaces that are both flexible and supportive of women’s diverse needs.

 

To further illustrate this complexity, consider the intersection of a woman’s identity with the fetus she carries. The politics of this relationship are influenced by broader societal narratives that often prioritize one subject over the other, leading to a diminished understanding of the woman’s agency and autonomy. When the fetus and mother are considered solely as social subjects, the fetus inherits a political status that infringes upon a woman’s rights, often reducing the mother’s identity to that of a mere vessel. Conversely, when viewed purely as bodily subjects, the emotional and psychological dimensions of motherhood may be overlooked, leading to a one-dimensional portrayal of women’s experiences. In addition, as bodily acts are socially stigmatized, and architecturally relegated to highly privatized spaces, to view the woman and fetus only as bodily subjects risks stigmatizing them. Thus, acknowledging the duality of subjectivity in reproductive health is essential for fostering a more inclusive dialogue that honors both the biological and social aspects of women’s lives.

 

Architecture has often reinforced this reductive subjectivity through spaces that prioritize function over the nuanced realities of reproductive healthcare. Drawing on Michel Foucault’s concept of the apparatus and Giorgio Agamben’s exploration of how apparatuses create specific subjects, reproductive healthcare spaces have historically modeled and constrained women’s identities. Elizabeth Grosz’s assertion that “space is experienced differently by differently sexed bodies” highlights the urgency of creating spaces that embrace the complexities of female embodiment rather than reducing it to stigmatized bodily subjectivity.

 

This project advocates for a new architectural typology that reflects the intertwined biological and social aspects of women’s identities, creating environments that foster agency and dismantle the stigma of bodily subjectivity. The challenge lies in developing a typology that not only accommodates the pragmatic needs of various users—patients, caregivers, and families—but also foregrounds and validates the complexity of their experiences. By integrating an aesthetic dimension into this typological framework, we can create environments that recognize the multifaceted nature of women’s identities and their reproductive choices. This approach aligns with Jacques Rancière’s arguments, which emphasize the degree to which the aesthetic appearance of the world defines the political possibilities of that world. For Rancière, redesigning how the public realm appears to us can, in turn, afford new political potentials. The design of reproductive healthcare spaces can thus serve as a powerful medium for asserting women’s identities, empowering them in their choices, and challenging the prevailing narratives that seek to simplify their experiences.

 

In light of these considerations, The Afternoon Place, located in Las Cruces, New Mexico, adopts a design strategy of affording excess—an architectural approach that intentionally resists prescriptive, program-driven definitions of reproductive care. Rather than constraining women to predetermined spatial scripts, the design constructs environments that exceed functional necessity in order to enable multiplicity, autonomy, and self-determined experience. Excess here is not surplus for its own sake, but cultivates a range of spatial and programmatic alternatives through which the architectural subject may locate, revise, or reinvent their position across time. This surplus does not dictate use but rather invites choice, cultivating an architectural subject who can select from among a plurality of possible performances. In doing so, the project reframes reproductive healthcare as a continuum of care, agency, and possibility—an open field rather than a closed procedure. Through this strategy of excess, architecture becomes not only a site of care, but also a site of recognition, where women are validated as full subjects capable of authoring their own reproductive narratives.