Centering disability visibility in reproductive health care: Dismantling barriers to achieve reproductive equity.

Access to comprehensive and culturally competent reproductive health care is essential for individuals and communities to realize and achieve health and well-being, as one prefers. The disability community represents a diverse group of individuals with a wide spectrum of functional, physical, sensory, and/or neurodivergent abilities. Existing barriers to reproductive health care are a consequence of environmental and attitudinal barriers, not from the disabilities themselves. People with disabilities are also not frequently centered or included in discussions surrounding reproductive rights. This article reviews the intersection of the Disability Justice Movement and the history of discrimination in the United States against people with disabilities with a particular focus on reproductive oppression. We discuss the mechanisms of inequity and barriers to health care, including financial barriers, inaccessible medical facilities, provider discrimination and competency, and guardianship; as well as the importance of open access to contraception, menstrual health, and abortion for people with disabilities. Finally, we explore the intersection of the Disability Justice Movement and the Reproductive Justice Movement to better promote reproductive autonomy.

Rural Location of Residence is Not Associated With Use of Telemedicine for Initial Medical Contact for Gender-Related Healthcare.

PURPOSE: There is very little information available regarding the health needs of transgender and gender diverse adolescents and young adults with gender dysphoria who reside in rural areas of the United States. This study aims to determine if residing in a rural area is associated with the use of telemedicine services, such as synchronous voice-video appointments, for initial contact for medical interventions for gender-related reasons in adolescents and young adults with gender incongruence. METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart review of patients (N = 176) ages 10-24 years who had an initial medical appointment for gender-related concerns between July 1, 2020 and June 30, 2022. Participants were determined to be rural or not based on address eligibility for rural-related health care services by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Rural Health Clinics Program or the Federal Office of Rural Health Policy grant programs. The use of telemedicine versus in-person appointments were compared, as were initial medical prescriptions (hormones, psychotropic medications, contraceptives, etc.) and recommendations for medical follow-ups made at this initial appointment. RESULTS: Most participants did not reside in a rural location (N = 130). There was no statistically significant difference in the use of telemedicine versus in-person care in rural patients (22% vs. 78%) as compared to nonrural patients (21% vs. 79%), nor any statistically significant differences in the medical decisions made at the initial appointment with respect to rurality or modality of care. DISCUSSION: Residing in a rural area is not associated with either choice of in-person care versus telemedicine services for initial medical appointments or medical decision-making.

Are pediatric surgery clinics LGBTQ+ inclusive?

PURPOSE: Creating inclusive LGBTQ+ environments is important in the provision of inclusive care. This cross sectional study assessed whether patient intake forms in pediatric surgery departments were LGBTQ+ inclusive (L-I). METHODS: North American pediatric surgery departments affiliated with pediatric surgery fellowships or general surgery residencies were contacted to retrieve patient intake forms. Forms were assessed for LGBTQ+ inclusivity using a novel L-I scoring system consisting of 6 criteria: preferred name, pronouns, preferred language, gender identity, sex assigned at birth, and l-I guardianship. Institutions without intake forms were invited to comment on their use of l-I intake questions. RESULTS: 59/125 programs responded to our query, 10 of which provided intake forms. Median l-I score was 2/6 points (range 1-4). l-I guardianship was the most common question asked. No intake form asked for pronouns. Of the 49 institutions without forms, 30.5% reported asking l-I questions during initial visits. Narratives from these institutions varied widely. Some institutions supported routine l-I questions while others stated l-I questions were unnecessary, irrelevant, and/or offensive. CONCLUSIONS: Few North American pediatric surgery departments consistently ask l-I questions during the intake process. Comments questioning the appropriateness and necessity of l-I questions highlight the need for LGBTQ+ education. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. TYPE OF STUDY: Cross sectional study.