The Impact of New and Renewed Restrictive State Abortion Laws on Pregnancy-Capable People with Diabetes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: When the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization in June 2022, the constitutional right to abortion was no longer protected by Roe v Wade. Fifteen states now have total or near-total bans on abortion care or no clinics providing abortion services. We review how these restrictions affect the medical care of people with pregestational diabetes. RECENT FINDINGS: Of the ten states with the highest percent of adult women living with diabetes, eight currently have complete or 6-week abortion bans. People with diabetes are at high risk of diabetes-related pregnancy complications and pregnancy-related diabetes complications and are disproportionately burdened by abortion bans. Abortion is an essential part of comprehensive, evidence-based diabetes care, yet no medical society has published guidelines on pregestational diabetes that explicitly discuss the importance and role of safe abortion care. Medical societies enacting standards for diabetes care and clinicians providing diabetes care must advocate for access to abortion to reduce pregnancy-related morbidity and mortality for pregnant people with diabetes.

Beyond Abortion: The Consequences of Overturning Roe.

The upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization has the potential to eliminate or severely restrict access to legal abortion care in the United States. We address the impact that the decision could have on abortion access and its consequences beyond abortion care. We posit that an abortion ban would, in effect, mean that anyone who becomes pregnant, including those who continue a pregnancy and give birth to healthy newborns and those with pregnancy complications or adverse pregnancy outcomes will become newly vulnerable to legal surveillance, civil detentions, forced interventions, and criminal prosecution. The harms imposed by banning or severely restricting abortion access will disproportionately affect persons of color and perpetuate structural racism. We caution that focusing on Roe as a decision that only protects ending a pregnancy ignores the protection that the decision also affords people who want to continue their pregnancies. It overlooks the ways in which overturning Roe will curtail fundamental rights for all those who become pregnant and will undermine their status as full persons meriting Constitutional protections. Such a singular focus inevitably obscures the common ground that people across the ideological spectrum might inhabit to ensure the safety, health, humanity, and rights of all people who experience pregnancy.

Bridging the Expertise of Advocates and Academics to Identify Reproductive Justice Learning Outcomes.

Phenomenon: Reproductive justice (RJ) is defined by women of color advocates as the right to have children, not have children and parent children while maintaining reproductive autonomy. In the United States, physicians have been complicit in multiple historical reproductive injustices, involving coercive sterilization of thousands of people of color, low income, and disabilities. Currently, reproductive injustices continue to occur; however, physicians have no formal RJ medical education to address injustices. The objective of this study was to engage leading advocates within the movement using a Delphi method to identify critical components for such a curriculum. Approach: In 2016, we invited 65 RJ advocates and leaders to participate in an expert panel to design RJ medical education. A 3-round Delphi survey was distributed electronically to identify content for inclusion in an RJ curriculum. In the next 2 survey rounds, experts offered feedback and revisions and rated agreement with including content recommendations in the final curriculum. We calculated descriptive statistics to analyze quantitative data. A team with educational expertise wrote learning outcomes based on expert content recommendations. Findings: Of the 65 RJ advocates and leaders invited, 41 participated on the expert panel of the Delphi survey. In the first survey, the expert panel recommended 58 RJ content areas through open-ended response. Over the next 2 rounds, there was consensus among the panel to include 52 of 58 of these areas in the curriculum. Recommended content fell into 11 broad domains: access, disparities, and structural competency; advocacy; approaches to reproductive healthcare; contemporary law and policy; cultural safety; historical injustices; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning, and intersex health; oppression, power, and bias training; patient care; reproductive health; and RJ definitions. The 97 learning outcomes created from this process represented both unique and existing educational elements. Insights: A collaborative methodology infused with RJ values can bridge experts in advocacy and academics. New learning outcomes identified through this process can enhance medical education; however, it is just as important to consider education in RJ approaches to care as it is knowledge about that care. We must explore the pedagogic process of RJ medical education while considering that expertise in this area may exist outside of the medical community and thus there is a need to partner with RJ advocates. Finally, we expect to use innovative teaching methods to transform medical education and achieve an RJ focus.

South African abortion attitudes from 2007-2016: the roles of religiosity and attitudes toward sexuality and gender equality.

Abortion is legal in South Africa, but negative abortion attitudes remain common and are poorly understood. We used nationally representative South African Social Attitudes Survey data to analyze abortion attitudes in the case of fetal anomaly and in the case of poverty from 2007 to 2016 (n = 20,711; ages = 16+). We measured correlations between abortion attitudes and these important predictors: religiosity, attitudes about premarital sex, attitudes about preferential hiring and promotion of women, and attitudes toward family gender roles. Abortion acceptability for poverty increased over time (b = 0.05, p < .001), but not for fetal anomaly (b = -0.008, p = .284). Highly religious South Africans reported lower abortion acceptability in both cases (Odds Ratio (OR)anomaly = 0.85, p = .015; ORpoverty = 0.84, p = .02). Premarital sex acceptability strongly and positively predicted abortion acceptability (ORanomaly = 2.63, p < .001; ORpoverty = 2.46, p < .001). Attitudes about preferential hiring and promotion of women were not associated with abortion attitudes, but favorable attitudes about working mothers were positively associated with abortion acceptability for fetal anomaly ((ORanomaly = 1.09, p = .01; ORpoverty = 1.02, p = .641)). Results suggest negative abortion attitudes remain common in South Africa and are closely tied to religiosity, traditional ideologies about sexuality, and gender role expectations about motherhood.

Stressful Life Events Around the Time of Unplanned Pregnancy and Women's Health: Exploratory Findings from a National Sample.

Objective Little is known about how women's social context of unintended pregnancy, particularly adverse social circumstances, relates to their general health and wellbeing. We explored associations between stressful life events around the time of unintended pregnancy and physical and mental health. Methods Data are drawn from a national probability study of 1078 U.S. women aged 18-55. Our internet-based survey measured 14 different stressful life events occurring at the time of unintended pregnancy (operationalized as an additive index score), chronic disease and mental health conditions, and current health and wellbeing symptoms (standardized perceived health, depression, stress, and discrimination scales). Multivariable regression modeled relationships between stressful life events and health conditions/symptoms while controlling for sociodemographic and reproductive covariates. Results Among ever-pregnant women (N = 695), stressful life events were associated with all adverse health outcomes/symptoms in unadjusted analyses. In multivariable models, higher stressful life event scores were positively associated with chronic disease (aOR 1.21, CI 1.03-1.41) and mental health (aOR 1.42, CI 1.23-1.64) conditions, higher depression (B 0.37, CI 0.19-0.55), stress (B 0.32, CI 0.22-0.42), and discrimination (B 0.74, CI 0.45-1.04) scores, and negatively associated with ≥ very good perceived health (aOR 0.84, CI 0.73-0.97). Stressful life event effects were strongest for emotional and partner-related sub-scores. Conclusion Women with adverse social circumstances surrounding their unintended pregnancy experienced poorer health. Findings suggest that reproductive health should be considered in the broader context of women's health and wellbeing and have implications for integrated models of care that address women's family planning needs, mental and physical health, and social environments.

Abortion attitudes among South Africans: findings from the 2013 social attitudes survey.

Abortion is legal in South Africa, but over half of abortions remain unsafe there. Evidence suggests women who are (Black) African, of lower socioeconomic status, living with HIV, or residents of Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, or Limpopo provinces are disproportionately vulnerable to morbidity or mortality from unsafe abortion. Negative attitudes toward abortion have been documented in purposively sampled studies, yet it remains unclear what attitudes exist nationally or whether they differ across sociodemographic groups, with implications for inequities in service accessibility and health. In the current study, we analysed nationally representative data from 2013 to estimate the prevalence of negative abortion attitudes in South Africa and to identify racial, socioeconomic and geographic differences. More respondents felt abortion was 'always wrong' in the case of family poverty (75.4%) as compared to foetal anomaly (55%), and over half of respondents felt abortion was 'always wrong' in both cases (52.5%). Using binary logistic regression models, we found significantly higher odds of negative abortion attitudes among non-Xhosa African and Coloured respondents (compared to Xhosa respondents), those with primary education or less, and residents of Gauteng and Limpopo (compared to Western Cape). We contextualise and discuss these findings using a human rights-based approach to health.

The Paradigm of the Paradox: Women, Pregnant Women, and the Unequal Burdens of the Zika Virus Pandemic.

The Zika pandemic provides biomedical scientists, clinicians, public health advocates, and governments a unique opportunity to advance reproductive justice by addressing the paradoxes outlined in this essay. The circumstances in which pregnancies occur are morally relevant to women's reproductive life decisions, to the provision of reproductive health care, and to the development of reproductive health policy. Whether the Zika pandemic might foster context-driven reproductive pandemic planning and response is yet to be determined. Maintaining the status quo will surely increase a range of global health disparities and further stratify reproduction, producing predictable and preventable outcomes in which some people receive the necessary care and resources to achieve family building while others are neglected. Women and men should be able to count on biomedical researchers to answer the questions that need answering without undue influence from political agendas. Women should be able to continue pregnancies and count on public health assistance and help for children with Zika-related disabilities, or prevent or end a Zika-affected pregnancy. Pandemic responses that don't further these ends are morally unacceptable.

Experiences With the Providers Share Workshop Method: Abortion Worker Support and Research in Tandem.

Abortion providers work in an environment characterized by the stresses of the helping professions as well as by the marginalization and devaluation that accompany work in a stigmatized field. We created the Providers Share Workshop (PSW), a five-session workshop carried out at seven abortion care sites around the United States, to support workers and better understand the complexities of working in abortion care. Qualitative analysis suggests that the experience of participating in the workshop fosters connection, and that the group process creates unique data about the abortion care team. Taken together, these results show that PSW fulfills the dual role of a supportive group intervention-helping create connections and foster resilience-and a research tool, producing rich, multi-perspective narratives of the abortion provision team. This method provides useful insight into supporting abortion care workers specifically, and may also prove useful in the study and support of other stigmatized workers generally.

Stratified reproduction, family planning care and the double edge of history.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is a growing clinical consensus that Medicaid sterilization consent protections should be revisited because they impede desired care for many women. Here, we consider the broad social and ideological contexts for past sterilization abuses, beyond informed consent. RECENT FINDINGS: Throughout the US history, the fertility and childbearing of poor women and women of color were not valued equally to those of affluent white women. This is evident in a range of practices and policies, including black women's treatment during slavery, removal of Native children to off-reservation boarding schools and coercive sterilizations of poor white women and women of color. Thus, reproductive experiences throughout the US history were stratified. This ideology of stratified reproduction persists today in social welfare programs, drug policy and programs promoting long-acting reversible contraception. SUMMARY: At their core, sterilization abuses reflected an ideology of stratified reproduction, in which some women's fertility was devalued compared to other women's fertility. Revisiting Medicaid sterilization regulations must therefore put issues of race, ethnicity, class, power and resources - not just informed consent - at the center of analyses.

Measuring stigma among abortion providers: assessing the Abortion Provider Stigma Survey instrument.

We explored the psychometric properties of 15 survey questions that assessed abortion providers' perceptions of stigma and its impact on providers' professional and personal lives referred to as the Abortion Provider Stigma Survey (APSS). We administered the survey to a sample of abortion providers recruited for the Providers' Share Workshop (N = 55). We then completed analyses using Stata SE/12.0. Exploratory factor analysis, which resulted in 13 retained items and identified three subscales: disclosure management, resistance and resilience, and discrimination. Stigma was salient in abortion provider's lives: they identified difficulties surrounding disclosure (66%) and felt unappreciated by society (89%). Simultaneously, workers felt they made a positive contribution to society (92%) and took pride in their work (98%). Paired t-test analyses of the pre- and post-Workshop APSS scores showed no changes in the total score. However, the Disclosure Management subscale scores were significantly lower (indicating decreased stigma) for two subgroups of participants: those over the age of 30 and those with children. This analysis is a promising first step in the development of a quantitative tool for capturing abortion providers' experiences of and responses to pervasive abortion stigma.

Doctors' Voices Generate Support for Abortion Care: Results from a Nationally Representative Survey.

OBJECTIVE: We tested abortion messaging to develop evidence-based communication recommendations for doctors who provide abortion care. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an on-line survey in a nationally representative sample of 1,215 people, using NORC's Amerispeak® Panel. We surveyed participants before and after viewing two brief videos featuring doctors who provide abortion care speaking about their work. Doctors' comments were grounded in strategic communications and applied psychology research and emphasized caregiving roles, avoided political-sounding punditry, and acknowledged abortion's complexities. We assessed participants' characterizations of doctors who provide abortion care, how these characterizations impact support for abortion restrictions and overall views on abortion legality. We analyzed pre-post data using descriptive statistics, t-tests and multivariable regression. RESULTS: Post-messaging more participants endorsed positive descriptors of doctors who provide abortion care (p<0.001,t=8.99); fewer endorsed negative descriptors (p<0.001,t=10.32). Increased post-messaging endorsement of positive descriptors predicted declines in support for abortion restrictions (AOR = 1.69,p<0.01); decreased endorsement of negative descriptors did not. After messaging, 37% of respondents said their views of doctors who provide abortion care made them less likely to support abortion restrictions, compared to 14% before (p<0.001,t=-6.9). After messaging there was more overall support for legal, accessible abortion and less for abortion being mostly illegal (46%→48% and 24%→22%,p<0.001;t=-4.11). CONCLUSIONS: When doctors who provide abortion care use messaging recommendations that include speaking about abortion's complexities and avoiding political-sounding punditry, they generate more support for legal abortion and less for restrictions. IMPLICATIONS: The voices of doctors who provide abortion care shape abortion public opinion. When doctors speak from caregiving perspectives, avoid punditry, and acknowledge abortion's complexities they generate more support for legal abortion and less for restrictions. However, audiences may not be aware a priori that ideas of doctors shape their views.

Disparities in abortion rates: a public health approach.

Women of lower socioeconomic status and women of color in the United States have higher rates of abortion than women of higher socioeconomic status and White women. Opponents of abortion use these statistics to argue that abortion providers are exploiting women of color and low socioeconomic status, and thus, regulations are needed to protect women. This argument ignores the underlying causes of the disparities. As efforts to restrict abortion will have no effect on these underlying factors, and instead will only result in more women experiencing later abortions or having an unintended childbirth, they are likely to result in worsening health disparities. We provide a review of the causes of abortion disparities and argue for a multifaceted public health approach to address them.

Why women are dying from unsafe abortion: narratives of Ghanaian abortion providers.

In Ghana, despite the availability of safe, legally permissible abortion services, high rates of morbidity and mortality from unsafe abortion persist. Through interviews with Ghanaian physicians on the front lines of abortion provision, we begin to describe major barriers to widespread safe abortion. Their stories illustrate the life-threatening impact that stigma, financial restraints, and confusion regarding abortion law have on the women of Ghana who seek abortion. They posit that the vast majority of serious abortion complications arise in the setting of clandestine or self-induced second trimester attempts, suggesting that training greater numbers of physicians to perform second trimester abortion is prerequisite to reducing maternal mortality. They also recognized that an adequate supply of abortion providers alone is a necessary but insufficient step toward reducing death from unsafe abortion. Rather, improved accessibility and cultural acceptability of abortion are integral to the actual utilization of safe services. Their insights suggest that any comprehensive plan aimed at reducing maternal mortality must consider avenues that address the multiple dimensions which influence the practice and utilization of safe abortion, especially in the second trimester.

Experience of stigma and harassment among respondents to the 2019 Canadian abortion provider survey.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a national survey to assess the experiences of stigma and harassment among physicians and nurse practitioners providing abortions and abortion service administrators in Canada. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an exploratory, cross-sectional, national, anonymized, online survey between July and December 2020. Subsections of the survey explored stigma and harassment experienced by respondents, including the 35-item Revised Abortion Providers Stigma Scale and open-ended responses. We analyzed the quantitative data to generate descriptive statistics and employed a reflexive thematic analysis to interpret open-ended responses. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-four participants started the stigma and harassment section of the survey. Among low-volume clinicians (<30 abortions/year, 60%, n = 180) 8% reported harassment; 21% among higher volume clinicians (≥30 abortions/year, 40%, n = 119) and 47% among administrators (n = 39), most commonly picketing. The mean stigma score was 67.8 (standard deviation 17.2; maximum score 175). Our qualitative analysis identified five themes characterizing perceptions of stigma and harassment: concerns related to harassment from picketing, protestors, and the public; wanting protestor "bubble zones"; aiming to be anonymous to avoid being a target; not providing an abortion service; but also witnessing a safe and positive practice environment. CONCLUSIONS: Being a low-volume clinician compared to higher volume clinician and administrator appears to be associated with less harassment. Clinicians providing abortion care in Canada reported mid-range abortion-related stigma scores, and expressed strong concerns that stigma interfered with their abortion provision. Our results indicate that further de-stigmatization and protection of abortion providers in Canada is needed through policy and practice interventions including bubble zones. IMPLICATIONS: While Canadian abortion care clinicians and administrators reported relatively low incidence of harassment, our results indicate that they are concerned about stigma and harassment. However, as this was an exploratory survey, these data may not be representative of all Canadian abortion providers. Our data identify a need to support abortion clinicians and to bolster protections for dedicated abortion services.

Levonorgestrel 52-mg Intrauterine Device Efficacy and Safety After More Than 8 Years of Use.

FUNDING SOURCE: Medicines360. The Sponsor, Medicines360, designed the study and oversaw its conduct, including funding the trial and providing all study product free of charge to participants. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00995150.