Laws governing access to sexual health services and information: contents, protections, and restrictions.

Access to sexual health services and information is critical to achieving the highest attainable standard of sexual health, and enabling legal environments are key to advancing progress in this area. In determining overall alignment with human rights standards to respect, protect, and fulfil sexual health-related rights without discrimination, there are many aspects of laws, including their specificity and content, which impact which sexual health services and information are availed, which are restricted, and for whom. To understand the nature of existing legal provisions surrounding access to sexual health services and information, we analysed the content of 40 laws in English, French, and Spanish from 18 countries for the specific sexual health services and information to which access is ensured or prohibited, and the non-discrimination provisions within these laws. Overall, there was wide variation across countries in the types of laws covering these services and the types and number of services and information ensured. Some countries covered different services through multiple laws, and most of the laws dedicated specifically to sexual health addressed only a narrow aspect of sexual health and covered a small range of services. The protected characteristics in non-discrimination provisions and the specificity of these provisions with regard to sexual health services also varied. Findings may inform national legal and policy dialogues around sexual health to identify opportunities for positive change, as well as to guide further investigation to understand the relationship between such legal provisions, the implementation of these laws within countries, and relevant sexual health outcomes.

Access to sexual health services and information is important to being able to have good sexual health. Laws are relevant because what they include and how specific they are affects what types of sexual health services people can access, what types of services are illegal, and whether or not all people can access services equally. We reviewed 40 laws in English, French, and Spanish from 18 countries to understand how many and which sexual health services and information countries ensure in their laws, which sexual health services are illegal, and which people are protected from discrimination in accessing these services. We found that countries use many different types of laws to ensure access to sexual health services or information, and most countries do not cover the same types or number of sexual health services. There are also differences in which people are specifically protected from discrimination in the laws we reviewed. These findings are important because they may help countries identify ways that access to sexual health services and information could be improved so as to improve people's sexual health. They may also guide future research.

Understanding the Impacts of the Supreme Court Case FDA v Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine.

This Viewpoint outlines the potential effects of the Supreme Court case regarding mifepristone restrictions: a decision for the FDA would allow current dispensing, while ruling against the FDA would severely curtail access to reproductive health options.

Gestational age limits for abortion and cross-border reproductive care in Europe: a mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about the experiences of women who travel within Europe for abortion care from countries with relatively liberal laws. This paper aims to assess the primary reasons for travel among a sample of women who travelled from European countries with relatively liberal abortion laws to obtain abortion care mainly in the UK and the Netherlands. DESIGN: Multi-country, 5-year mixed methods study on barriers to legal abortion and travel for abortion. SETTING: UK, the Netherlands and Spain. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: We present quantitative data from 204 surveys, and qualitative data from 30 in-depth interviews with pregnant people who travelled to the UK, the Netherlands and Spain from countries where abortion is legal on broad grounds within specific gestational age (GA) limits. METHODS: Mixed-methods. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: GA when presenting at abortion clinic, primary reason for abortion-related travel. RESULTS: Study participants overwhelmingly reported travelling for abortion because they had exceeded GA limits in their country of residence. Participants also reported numerous delays and barriers to receiving care. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the need for policies that support access to abortion throughout pregnancy and illustrate that early access to it is necessary but not sufficient to meet people's reproductive health needs. FUNDING: This study is funded by the European Research Council (ERC). TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: This study shows that GA limits drive women from EU countries where abortion is legal to seek abortions abroad.

Emergency contraception: unresolved clinical, ethical and legal quandaries still linger.

Emergency contraception (EC) has been prescribed for decades, in order to lessen the risk of unplanned and unwanted pregnancy following unprotected intercourse, ordinary contraceptive failure, or rape. EC and the linked aspect of unintended pregnancy undoubtedly constitute highly relevant public health issues, in that they involve women's self-determination, reproductive freedom and family planning. Most European countries regulate EC access quite effectively, with solid information campaigns and supply mechanisms, based on various recommendations from international institutions herein examined. However, there is still disagreement on whether EC drugs should be available without a physician's prescription and on the reimbursement policies that should be implemented. In addition, the rights of health care professionals who object to EC on conscience grounds have been subject to considerable legal and ethical scrutiny, in light of their potential to damage patients who need EC drugs in a timely fashion. Ultimately, reproductive health, freedom and conscience-based refusal on the part of operators are elements that have proven extremely hard to reconcile; hence, it is essential to strike a reasonable balance for the sake of everyone's rights and well-being.

Affordable but Inaccessible? Contraception Deserts in the US States.

CONTEXT: This article focuses on whether, and the extent to which, the resources made available by Title X-the only federal policy aimed specifically at reproductive health care-are equitably accessible. Here, equitable means that barriers to accessing services are lowest for those people who need them most. METHODS: The authors use geographic information systems (GIS) and statistical/spatial analysis (specifically the integrated two-step floating catchment area [I2SFCA] method) to study the spatial and nonspatial accessibility of Title X clinics in 2018. FINDINGS: The authors find that contraception deserts vary across the states, with between 17% and 53% of the state population living in a desert. Furthermore, they find that low-income people and people of color are more likely to live in certain types of contraception deserts. CONCLUSIONS: The analyses reveal not only a wide range of sizes and shapes of contraception deserts across the US states but also a range of severity of inequity.

The Global Gag Rule: The death trap for comprehensive sexual and reproductive healthcare and way to overcome the US gag rule.

The United States of America (USA) is one of the largest bilateral donors in the field of global health assistance. There are beneficiaries in 70 countries around the world. In 2015, the USA released US$638 million for the improvement of global health status by promoting family planning services. Unfortunately, in 2017, Trump administration reinstated Mexico City Policy/Global Gag Rule (GGR). This policy prevents non-US nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) from receiving US health financial assistance if they have any relationship with abortion-related services. This restriction pushed millions of lives into great danger due to the lack of comprehensive family planning services, especially lack of abortion-related services. This article has attempted to let the readers know about the impacts of GGR around the world and how global leaders are trying to overcome the harmful effects of this rule. Finally, it proposes some solutions to the impacts of the extension of Mexico City Policy.

Maternal mortality, abortion access, and optimizing care in an increasingly restrictive United States: A review of the current climate.

The United States is facing a national crisis related to increasing rates of maternal morbidity and mortality. Over the past few years, significant focus has been turned to initiatives that aim to address maternal morbidity and mortality rates. In parallel, the United States has seen a significant increase in restrictive abortion access state laws. The link between abortion restrictions and worsening maternal outcomes has been proposed. This review article outlines the national crisis of maternal morbidity and mortality, the potential role of limiting abortion access in this crisis, and the significant racial, socioeconomic, and geographical disparities that exist.

Travel Time to Title X Facilities and Teenage Birth Rates in North Carolina.

OBJECTIVES: In the United States, Title X facilities are understood to be an effective starting point for improving teenagers' reproductive health outcomes, including unintended pregnancy. We investigate geographic accessibility of Title X facilities and the relationship between geographic accessibility of Title X facilities and teenage birth rates in the state of North Carolina (NC). METHODS: Vehicular travel time from each ZCTA to its nearest Title X facility was calculated using a geographic information system and summarized as the indicator of geographic accessibility. We used bivariate and multiple spatial lag regressions to evaluate the relationship between ZCTA-level teenage birth rates (n = 754) in 2016 and geographic accessibility to a Title X facility, as well as socioeconomic and demographic factors. RESULTS: Nearly 60% of teenage women lived 30 min or less from a Title X funded facility, while approximately 12% of women lived 60 min or more from the nearest facility. In the regression models, percent non-Hispanic White, percent Hispanic, percent in Poverty, percent not enrolled in school, and population density were associated with teenage birth rates; however, geographic accessibility was only associated in the bivariate model. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that geographic accessibility of Title X facilities is lower in NC than in other states. However, our results suggest that geographic accessibility is not related to teenage birth rates. Overall, these findings may indicate that publicly funded family planning facilities are underutilized by proximal populations or factors other than proximity act as a barrier to utilization.

Reproductive health and the politics of abortion.

This editorial provides an overview of a thematic series that brings attention to the persistently deficient and unequal access to sexual and reproductive health services for young women in sub-Saharan Africa. It represents an effort to analyze the multifaceted relationship between laws, policies and access to services in Ethiopia, Zambia and Tanzania. Using a comparative perspective and qualitative research methodology, the papers presented in this issue explore legal, political and social factors and circumstances that condition access to sexual and reproductive health services within and across the three countries. Through these examples we show the often inconsistent and even paradoxical relationship between the formal law and practices on the ground. Particular emphasis is placed on safe abortion services as an intensely politicized issue in global sexual and reproductive health. In addition to the presentation of the individual papers, this editorial comments on the global politics of abortion which represents a critical context for the regional and local developments in sexual and reproductive health policy and care provision in general, and for the contentious issue of abortion in particular.

Title X Regulatory Changes and Their Impact on Adolescent Health.

Title X of the Public Health Act has provided access to confidential reproductive care for low-income adolescents and adults since 1970, helping to bring adolescent pregnancy rates to historic lows. Recent regulatory changes in program funding eligibility and provider counseling options may reverse this trend. This policy brief will address the history and impact of Title X funding on adolescent access to reproductive health care, explain the implications of these recent regulatory changes in Title X implementation, and encourage advocacy to protect health care provider practice and adolescent access to confidential care.

Out of the Freezer and into the Policy Fire: Quandaries in Reproductive Cryopreservation.

The field of assisted reproduction is advancing rapidly and is ripe for regulation and guidance. In 2018, over four thousand frozen eggs and embryos were lost to approximately one thousand patients at Ahuja University Hospital in Cleveland, Ohio, due to an accidental thaw of a cryopreservation tank. The precedent that will be set by the Ahuja class-action case is significant for both past events and future possibilities and is core to the discussion of policy involving the cryopreservation of gametes and embryos.

Crossing U.S. Borders While Pregnant: An Increasingly Complex Reality.

In response to the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of Ireland, which states that the fetus and the mother have equal rights to life and that nearly all abortions are therefore illegal, many Irish feminists sported luggage tags that read "HEALTHCARE NOT AIRFARE." The expression-which recently became a popular twitter hashtag for pro-choice citizens of Ireland leading up to the historic referendum to repeal that abortion ban-refers to the fact that pregnant women from Ireland have long been forced to travel to other European countries in order to legally terminate their pregnancies. In the United States, there is also a deep and challenging relationship between borders and reproductive health. However, that relationship is not understood as clearly as it appears to be in the Irish context. We urgently need to pay careful attention to the interconnections between U.S. border politics and reproductive health care access and to take concrete steps to address resultant injustices.

ACOG Committee Opinion No. 749 Summary: Marriage and Family Building Equality for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, and Gender Nonconforming Individuals.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists reaffirms its support of unrestricted access to legal marriage for all adults. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists believes that no matter how a child comes into a family, all children and parents deserve equitable protections and access to available resources to maximize the health of that family unit. Obstetrician-gynecologists should recognize the diversity in parenting desires that exists in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, and gender nonconforming communities and should take steps to ensure that clinical spaces are affirming and open to all patients, such that equitable and comprehensive, reproductive health care can meet the needs of these communities. This Committee Opinion is updated to include and capture a broader diversity of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, and gender nonconforming communities, and their desires surrounding family formation, including legal recognition and benefits, and additional support of the positive effect marriage equality has on physical, mental, and financial health.

Race and Assisted Reproduction: Implications for Population Health.

This Article emerges from Fordham Law Reviews Symposium on the fiftieth anniversary of Loving v. Virginia, the case that found antimiscegenation laws unconstitutional. Inspired by the need to interrogate the regulation of race in the context of family, this Article examines the diffuse regulatory environment around assisted reproductive technology (ART) that shapes procreative decisions and the inequalities that these decisions may engender. ART both centers biology and raises questions about how we imagine our racial futures in the context of family, community, and nation. Importantly, ART demonstrates how both the state and private actors shape family formation along racial lines. By placing a discussion about race and ART in the context of access to new health technologies, this Article argues that assisted reproduction has population-level effects that mirror broader racial disparities in health. In turn, this Article intervenes in a bioethics debate that frequently ignores inequalities in access when thinking through the consequences of ART. Part I presents a case study of the Sperm Bank of California (SBC) to demonstrate how ART represents a new mode of governing the family that facilitates and encourages the formation and creation of monoracial families. Part II borrows a public health analytic, the 'burdens of disease," to explain how the (re)production of monoracial families has consequences for health at the population level, especially when placed in the context of racially disparate access to ART services. Ultimately, this Article concludes that ART, as it is currently accessed and utilized, maintains racial orders with regard to health given the inequality in access to these services.