RESUMO
Background: Abortion stigma has been shown to influence provider attitudes around abortion and may decrease provider willingness to participate in abortion care, or lead some to obstruct care. However, this link remains understudied. Methods: The present study uses baseline data collected through a cluster-randomized controlled trial in 16 public sector health facilities in South Africa in 2020. A total of 279 clinical and non-clinical health facility workers were surveyed. Primary outcome measures included: 1) willingness to facilitate abortion care in eight hypothetical scenarios, 2) facilitation of abortion care in the last 30 days, and 3) obstruction of abortion care in the last 30 days. Logistic regression models were used to assess the association between level of stigma as measured through the Stigmatizing Attitudes, Beliefs and Actions Scale (SABAS) and the primary outcomes. Results: Overall, 50% of respondents in the sample were willing to facilitate abortion care in each of the eight scenarios, with differences in willingness based on the abortion client's age and personal situation in each scenario. Over 90% reported facilitating abortion care in the last 30 days, but 31% also reported having obstructed abortion care in the last 30 days. Stigma was significantly associated with willingness to facilitate abortion care and actual obstruction of abortion care in the last 30 days. Controlling for covariates, odds of willingness to facilitate abortion care in every scenario decreased with every one-point increase in SABAS score (reflecting more stigmatizing attitudes), and odds of obstructing abortion care increased with every one-point increase in SABAS score. Conclusions: Lower abortion stigma on the part of health facility workers was associated with willingness to facilitate abortion access but not actual facilitation of abortion services. Higher abortion stigma was associated with actual obstruction of an abortion service in the last 30 days. Interventions to reduce stigma towards women seeking abortion, and particularly negative stereotyping, among all health facility staff is key to ensuring equitable and non-discriminatory access to abortion. Trial registration: Retrospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT04290832) on February 27, 2020. Plain english summary: The link between stigma against women seeking abortion and decisions around whether to provide, abstain, or obstruct abortion care remains understudied. This paper assesses how stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes towards women seeking abortion in South Africa affects willingness to facilitate abortion care and actual facilitation or obstruction of abortion care in practice. A total of 279 clinical and non-clinical health facility workers were surveyed between February and March 2020. Overall, half of respondents in the sample were willing to facilitate abortion care in each of the eight scenarios, with important differences in willingness by scenario. Almost all respondents reported facilitating an abortion procedure in the last 30 days, but one in three also reported having obstructed abortion care in the last 30 days. More stigmatizing attitudes corresponded to decreased willingness to provide abortion care and increased odds of obstructing abortion care. Results show that stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs, and actions toward women who seek abortion shape how clinical and non-clinical staff in South Africa feel about their participation in abortion services and whether they obstruct this care. Facility staff hold great power in determining whose abortions are facilitated and whose are obstructed, resulting in stigma and discrimination being openly perpetuated. Continuous work to reduce stigma towards women seeking abortion among all health workers is key to ensuring equitable and non-discriminatory access to abortion for all.
RESUMO
Conscientious objection (CO) on the part of healthcare providers is a growing threat to safe abortion access. In South Africa, evidence suggests that this legal clause may be manipulated as a justification for public-sector healthcare providers to exempt themselves from their duties to provide essential reproductive health services as required by national laws and protocols. This qualitative study improves our understanding of the definitions, perspectives, and use of CO among providers, staff, and facility managers in South Africa, and CO's effect on public-sector abortion availability. Using 18 focus group discussions and 23 in-depth interviews, we examined CO attitudes and behaviours of staff from health facilities that provide abortion care in Gauteng, Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal, and Eastern Cape Provinces. We find that CO is invoked for a variety of reasons, some unrelated to the legal basis for objection. There have been progressive shifts in attitudes towards abortion over time, but stigma against women and girls who seek abortion remains substantial among staff at facilities providing abortion. Providers who offer abortion services also report high levels of discrimination and isolation from colleagues. Such factors, combined with operational barriers to offering quality abortion care (such as lack of training support or financial incentives) and lack of clarity on CO definitions and procedures, may incentivise some providers to invoke CO inappropriately. Dissemination of national guidelines on CO should be prioritised to reduce ambiguity, and interventions addressing abortion stigma should be considered for all facility staff to safeguard abortion availability in South Africa.
