Interference with and abuses of sexual and reproductive health and rights: a new proposal for classification and terminology.

There has been overuse of the term 'reproductive coercion', with a potential for confusion and weakening of messaging. This opinion paper proposes a classification for the many and varied types of interference with, and abuse of, sexual and reproductive health and rights. It also stresses the need for accurate portrayal of behaviours, however uncomfortable this may be for survivors or perpetrators. There are a range of abuses including denial of access to services, control, pressure, threats, coercion and violence. Violence may consist of neglect, mistreatment, exploitation or sexual assault. Abuses are categorised sociologically, according to micro, meso and macro levels of influence. Many types of behaviour at meso and macro level contain elements of racism. It is concluded that the term reproductive coercion and abuse should refer only to micro level behaviour. Healthcare professionals should ascertain that no practices that could be considered abusive are taking place in their workplace.

Long-acting reversible contraception: Targeting those judged to be unfit for parenthood in the United States and the United Kingdom.

There is a long history of regarding marginalised groups as unfit to parent and of eugenic policies targeting those with 'undesirable' bodily conditions or behaviours. This is part of a broader pattern of stratified reproduction - structural conditions that enable or discourage certain groups from reproducing - that often brings about and exacerbates injustices. This paper critically assesses the US and UK social and medical literature on applying pressure to marginalised groups, or those who have behaved 'irresponsibly', to use long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). Targeting young people for LARC fails to recognise that social inequality is the context for teenage pregnancy, not the result of it. Provider pressure on women of colour to use LARC is linked to institutional racism, whilst policy for those with physical and intellectual disabilities is shaped by disability discrimination. Other groups to be targeted include so-called 'welfare mothers', substance users, those who have had children put into care and offenders. Particularly controversial are cases in which LARC has been ordered by courts. LARC policy incorporating these kind of discriminatory practices needs to stop; future policy should focus on person-centred care that bolsters reproductive justice.

Recommendations for validation testing of home pregnancy tests (HPTs) in Europe.

Home pregnancy tests (HPTs) available in Europe include accuracy and other performance claims listed on their packaging. Due to the lack of guidance on the standardisation of such products, it is often difficult to replicate these claims when tested on a clinical sample, whether in a laboratory setting or by lay users. The In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation is a set of requirements that mandate comprehensive validation data on human pregnancy tests and other in vitro devices. It is due to replace the current European Directive (98/79/EC) and fully implemented in Europe by 2022. In June 2019, a panel of seven experts convened to discuss the validation studies required to provide the information needed to meet the new regulation for HPTs in Europe and proposed 15 recommendations for best practice. Defining best practice at all stages of validation of these important tests may ensure that tests marketed in Europe are fit for purpose, enabling lay users to be confident of the high quality of the HPT results they obtain. The panelists believe that the recommendations proposed here for the validation of HPTs may constructively contribute to improved standardisation of validation procedures in Europe.

The ethics of state-sponsored and clinical promotion of long-acting reversible contraception.

OBJECTIVES: To review ethical aspects of the promotion and provision of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). Specifically, to examine (1) the tension between informational exchange and the active promotion of LARC methods to new and existing contraceptive users by healthcare professionals; and (2) the distinct ethical issues arising from the promotion of LARC methods by state-sponsored actors and healthcare professionals. METHODS: Narrative review and ethical analysis. FINDINGS: There is an ethical difference between raising awareness/informational provision and actively promoting or prioritising specific contraceptive methods. It matters whether the policy choice is made, or the promotional activity about contraception is undertaken, by individual healthcare professionals at a local level or by more remote state-sponsored actors, because the relationship between the promoter and the (potential) contraceptive user is of a different kind. Imposing a dual responsibility upon healthcare professionals for raising awareness/informational exchange and the active promotion of LARC creates an unnecessary tension and barrier for the delivery of patient-centred care. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the need for ethical reflection on the central role of the promoting agent and the distinction between facilitating informational awareness and active promotion of LARC. LARC methods should not be prioritised in isolation and without regard to the wider implications of public promotion. A balanced narrative and information-sharing programme that respects the individual interests of each contraceptive user is called for, especially in direct professional/service user relationships. No assumption should be made that user decision-making will necessarily be determined and influenced solely by the relative effectiveness of the contraceptive method.

Mandatory Waiting Periods Before Abortion and Sterilization: Theory and Practice.

Some laws insist on a fixed, compulsory waiting period between the time of obtaining consent and when abortions or sterilizations are carried out. Waiting periods are designed to allow for reflection on the decision and to minimize regret. In fact, the cognitive processing needed for these important decisions takes place relatively rapidly. Clinicians are used to handling cases individually and tailoring care appropriately, including giving more time for decision-making. Psychological considerations in relation to the role of emotion in decision-making, eg, regret, raise the possibility that waiting periods could have a detrimental impact on the emotional wellbeing of those concerned which might interfere with decision-making. Having an extended period of time to consider how much regret one might feel as a consequence of the decision one is faced with may make a person revisit a stable decision. In abortion care, waiting periods often result in an extra appointment being needed, delays in securing a procedure and personal distress for the applicant. Some women end up being beyond the gestational limit for abortion. Those requesting sterilization in a situation of active conflict in their relationship will do well to postpone a decision on sterilization. Otherwise, applicants for sterilization should not be forced to wait. Forced waiting undermines people's agency and autonomous decision-making ability. Low-income groups are particularly disadvantaged. It may be discriminatory when applied to marginalized groups. Concern about the validity of consent is best addressed by protective clinical guidelines rather than through rigid legislation. Waiting periods breach reproductive rights. Policymakers and politicians in countries that have waiting periods in sexual and reproductive health regulation should review relevant laws and policies and bring them into line with scientific and ethical evidence and international human rights law.

A Constructivist Vision of the First-Trimester Abortion Experience.

How might the abortion experience look in a world without the existing regulatory constraints? This paper critically assesses the evidence about how a high-quality abortion experience might be achieved in the first trimester. There would need to be positive obligations on states in pursuance of women's reproductive rights. The onus would be on states and state actors to justify interferences and constraints upon a woman's right to terminate in the first trimester of her pregnancy. In this vision, abortion is person-centered and normalized as far as possible. High-quality information about abortion would be freely available through multiple sources and in varying formats. Whenever possible, abortion would happen in a place chosen by the woman, and in the case of medical abortion, could be self-managed with excellent clinical backup on hand should the need arise. The overarching purpose of this paper is to highlight the broader environment and framework of state obligations necessary to underpin the lived experience of abortion.

Incentivised sterilisation: lessons from India and for the future.

Family planning programmes in India have historically been target-driven and incentive-based with sterilisation seen as a key component of controlling population growth. This opinion paper uses India as the backcloth to examine the ethics of using incentive policy measures to promote and secure sterilisations within communities. Whilst we acknowledge that these measures have some value in reproductive health care, their use raises specific issues and wider concerns where the outcome is likely to be permanent and life changing for the acceptor.

Normalising abortion: what role can health professionals play?

BACKGROUND: Despite being a common gynaecological procedure, abortion continues to be widely stigmatised. The research and medical communities are increasingly considering ways of reducing stigma, and health professionals have a role to play in normalising abortion as part of routine sexual and reproductive healthcare (SRH). We sought to investigate how health professionals may normalise abortion and challenge prevailing negative sociocultural narratives. METHODS: As part of the Sexuality and Abortion Stigma Study (SASS), qualitative secondary analysis was conducted on two datasets containing health professionals' accounts of providing abortion in Scotland and England. A subsample of 20 interviews were subjected to in-depth, thematic analysis. RESULTS: Four key themes were identified in heath professionals' accounts: (1) encountering resistance to abortion from others working in SRH; (2) contending with prevailing negative sociocultural narratives of abortion; (3) enacting overt positivity towards abortion provision; and (4) presenting abortion as part of normal, routine healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: It is clear that negative attitudes toward abortion persist both inside and outside of healthcare systems, and need to be challenged in order to destigmatise those accessing and providing services. Health professionals can play a key role in normalising abortion, through the ways in which they frame their work and present abortion to women they treat, and others more widely. Our analysis suggests a key way to achieve this is by presenting abortion as part of normal, routine SRH, but that appropriate support and structural change are essential for normalisation to become embedded.

Toward normalising abortion: findings from a qualitative secondary analysis study.

In most settings worldwide, abortion continues to be highly stigmatised. Whilst a considerable body of literature has addressed abortion stigma, what is less commonly examined are the ways in which those with experience of abortion describe it in non-negative terms which may resist or reject stigma. Drawing on qualitative secondary analysis of five UK datasets using a narrative inquiry approach, we explore: the use of non-negative language around abortion, potential components of a normalising narrative, and constraints on non-negativity. As such, we present the first empirical UK study to critically examine how a dominant negative abortion narrative might be disrupted.

Pregnancies associated with etonogestrel implants in the UK: comparison of two 5-year reporting periods.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To identify pregnancies associated with the use of the contraceptive implants Implanon and Nexplanon in the UK during two 5-year reporting periods. (2) To classify the possible reasons for device failure in cases reported for each implant. (3) To examine any differences between reasons for pregnancies associated with these products. STUDY DESIGN: Extraction of data from the UK spontaneous reporting system for adverse drug reactions in relation to etonogestrel implants. Reports indicating pregnancy were identified for the periods 2005-2009 (Implanon) and 2012-2016 (Nexplanon). Possible reasons for failure of the method in each reported case were assigned to one of eight predetermined categories. RESULTS: After exclusions, 229 Implanon and 234 Nexplanon cases contained sufficient information for analysis. True method failures accounted for a majority of the pregnancies in those using contraceptive implants (58%); the next most common cause was missing implants (26% of pregnancies). In all categories of cases, there was no difference in frequency of pregnancy when the two time periods were compared. CONCLUSIONS: There is still potential for greater avoidance of pregnancies associated with etonogestrel implant use. IMPLICATIONS: This study underscores the continuing need for taking a full drug history, timing the insertion on days 1-5 or according to recommended quick starting routines and palpating the arm after implant insertion.

Self-assessment of success of early medical abortion using a self-performed urine pregnancy test.

Purpose: The European Society of Contraception Expert Group on Abortion identified as one of its priorities the need to disseminate up-to-date evidence-based information on the use of urine pregnancy tests by women for the self assessment of the success of early medical abortion (EMA). Methods and materials: A concise communication was produced which summarises the latest research in an easy-to-read format suitable for busy clinicians. Information about individual urinary pregnancy tests is presented in boxes for ease of reference. Results: Urinary pregnancy tests (low sensitivity, high sensitivity and multilevel) can be used in combination with signs and symptoms of pregnancy to exclude an ongoing pregnancy after EMA. Conclusion: Women are able to determine the success of early medical abortion (EMA) themselves using a combination of signs, symptoms and a urine pregnancy test. This simplifies EMA, expands the range of professionals able to provide EMA and most importantly gives women greater control over their bodies and treatment.

Sterilisations at delivery or after childbirth: Addressing continuing abuses in the consent process.

Non-consensual sterilisation is not only a historic abuse. Cases of unethical treatment of women around the time of a pregnancy continue in the Twenty-First Century in five continents. Sterilisation is being carried out by some healthcare professionals at the time of delivery, or soon afterwards, without valid consent. A range of contemporary examples of such practices is given. Respecting women's autonomy should be the touchstone of the consent process. Avoidance of force, duress, deception and manipulation should go without saying. Ethnic minority communities and women living with HIV, in particular, are being targeted for this kind of abuse. Attempts have been made in various countries and by international professional organisations to introduce clinical guidelines to steer health professionals away from this malpractice. Survivors have sought justice in domestic and international courts. This paper critically assesses the evidence on the practical, ethical and legal issues around the handling of consent for these procedures. Suggestions are made about possible regulatory responses that address abuse, whilst maintaining access for those individuals who freely elect to undergo these procedures.

Reproductive control by others: means, perpetrators and effects.

BACKGROUND: Reproductive control of women by others comprises a wide range of behaviours, from persuasion to pressure such as emotional blackmail, societal or family expectations, through to threats of or actual physical violence. It is defined as behaviours that interfere with women's reproductive autonomy as well as any actions that pressurise or coerce a woman into initiating or terminating a pregnancy METHOD: Narrative review based on a search of medical and social science literature. RESULTS: Reproductive control by others includes control or coercion over decisions about becoming pregnant and also about continuing or terminating a pregnancy. It can be carried out by intimate partners, the wider family, or as part of criminal behaviour. One form is contraceptive sabotage, which invalidates the consent given to sex. Contraceptive sabotage includes the newly-described behaviour of 'stealthing': the covert removal of a condom during sex. Reproductive control by others is separate from intimate partner violence but there are similarities and the phenomena overlap. Reproductive control by others is reported by as many as one quarter of women attending sexual and reproductive healthcare services. Those treating such women should be familiar with the concept and how to ameliorate its effects. Screening questions for its detection have been developed as well as interventions to reduce its risk. CONCLUSIONS: Reproductive control by others is common and those working in women's health should be familiar with the concept and with screening tools used to detect it.

Sterilization of those with intellectual disability: Evolution from non-consensual interventions to strict safeguards.

Non-consensual sterilization is one of the characteristic historical abuses that took place mainly in the first half of the 20th century. People with intellectual disability (ID) were a prime target as part of the ideology of negative eugenics. In certain jurisdictions, laws were in force for several decades that permitted sterilization without the need for consent or with consent from third parties. The long-term adverse effects on those sterilized against their will have only more recently been recognized. In the latter half of the 20th century, human rights treaties were introduced and developed; they have, in the main, curbed sterilization abuses. Courts have developed more stringent criteria for making decisions on applications for sterilization, and nowadays there are mostly adequate safeguards in place to protect those with ID from non-consensual sterilization. The only exception should be the particular case in which, all medical and social factors having been taken into account, sterilization is overwhelmingly thought to be the right decision for the individual unable to give consent.