Impact of the Dobbs decision on abortion services from a large tertiary center in Oregon.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the impact of the Dobbs vs Jackson decision on abortion care at an academic center in Oregon, a state with no legal restrictions on abortion. STUDY DESIGN: Electronic health records from patients who received an abortion at Oregon's largest tertiary hospital were utilized to compare the years before and after Dobbs. RESULTS: Monthly average abortions increased from 57.8 pre-Dobbs to 77.1 post-Dobbs (p = 0.001). This trend was associated with an increased proportion of out-of-state patients (14.3% vs 9.5%, p = 0.004) presenting with gestational duration ≥26 weeks (23.6% vs 3.7% in-state, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Dobbs decision resulted in increased utilization of hospital-based abortion care in a protective state. IMPLICATIONS: This study reflects the critical role of protective states such as Oregon in preserving access to abortion services and the need for continued support to alleviate the impact of nationwide barriers to reproductive healthcare.

Addressing challenges related to the professional practice of abortion post-Roe.

The landmark Roe vs Wade Supreme Court decision in 1973 established a constitutional right to abortion. In June 2022, the Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision brought an end to the established professional practice of abortion throughout the United States. Rights-based reductionism and zealotry threaten the professional practice of abortion. Rights-based reductionism is generally the view that moral or ethical issues can be reduced exclusively to matters of rights. In relation to abortion, there are 2 opposing forms of rights-based reductionism, namely fetal rights reductionism, which emphasizes the rights for the fetus while disregarding the rights and autonomy of the pregnant patient, and pregnant patient rights reductionism, which supports unlimited abortion without regards for the fetus. The 2 positions are irreconcilable. This article provides historical examples of the destructive nature of zealotry, which is characterized by extreme devotion to one's beliefs and an intolerant stance to opposing viewpoints, and of the importance of enlightenment to limit zealotry. This article then explores the professional responsibility model as a clinically ethically sound approach to overcome the clashing forms of rights-based reductionism and zealotry and to address the professional practice of abortion. The professional responsibility model refers to the ethical and professional obligations that obstetricians and other healthcare providers have toward pregnant patients, fetuses, and the society at large. It provides a more balanced and nuanced approach to the abortion debate, avoiding the pitfalls of reductionism and zealotry, and allows both the rights of the woman and the obligations to pregnant and fetal patients to be considered alongside broader ethical, medical, and societal implications. Constructive and respectful dialogue is crucial in addressing diverse perspectives and finding common ground. Embracing the professional responsibility model enables professionals to manage abortion responsibly, thereby prioritizing patients' interests and navigating between absolutist viewpoints to find balanced ethical solutions.

Examining ethno-racial attitudes of the public in Twitter discourses related to the United States Supreme Court Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling: A machine learning approach.

Background: The decision of the US Supreme Court to repeal Roe vs. Wade sparked significant media attention. Although primarily related to abortion, opinions are divided about how this decision would impact disparities, especially for Black, Indigenous, and people of color. We used advanced natural language processing (NLP) techniques to examine ethno-racial contents in Twitter discourses related to the overturn of Roe vs. Wade. Methods: We screened approximately 3 million tweets posted to Roe vs. Wade discussions and identified unique tweets in English-language that had mentions related to race, ethnicity, and racism posted between June 24 and July 10, 2022. We performed lexicon-based sentiment analysis to identify sentiment polarity and the emotions expressed in the Twitter discourse and conducted structural topic modeling to identify and examine latent themes. Results: Of the tweets retrieved, 0.7% (n = 23,044) had mentions related to race, ethnicity, and racism. The overall sentiment polarity was negative (mean = -0.41, SD = 1.48). Approximately 60.0% (n = 12,092) expressed negative sentiments, while 39.0% (n = 81,45) expressed positive sentiments, and 3.0% (n = 619) expressed neutral sentiments. There were 20 latent themes which emerged from the topic model. The predominant topics in the discourses were related to "racial resentment" (topic 2, 11.3%), "human rights" (topic 2, 7.9%), and "socioeconomic disadvantage" (topic 16, 7.4%). Conclusions: Our study demonstrates wide ranging ethno-racial concerns following the reversal of Roe and supports the need for active surveillance of racial and ethnic disparities in abortion access in the post-Roe era.