Abortion pills on TV: An exploratory study of the associations between abortion plotline viewership and beliefs regarding in-clinic and self-managed medication abortion.

OBJECTIVES: Entertainment television is an influential source of health information, including about reproductive health. We investigated the association between exposure to television plotlines about medication abortion on audience awareness and beliefs about medication abortion. STUDY DESIGN: We administered a national cross-sectional online survey from December 2021 to January 2022 with a probability-based sample of people assigned female at birth. We asked respondents to select plotlines they had seen from a list of seven that portrayed medication abortion. Among the 3425 people who responded to plotline items, 3340 responded to our outcome measures. Using weighed multivariable analyses, we examined adjusted relationships between exposure to specific types of abortion plotlines and awareness of and beliefs about medication abortion medical safety. RESULTS: We found that audience exposure to medication abortion plotlines in which the medication abortion was obtained from a clinic and portrayed as safe was associated with greater awareness of medication abortion compared to nonexposure (RR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.17, 2.40). Exposure to plotlines that portrayed MA or self-managed MA as safe was associated with audience beliefs that medication abortion is safe. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the content of abortion plotlines and exposure to accurate information may be connected to audience awareness of and beliefs about abortion. IMPLICATIONS: In a climate of misinformation about abortion, audience exposure to medically accurate television plotlines about medication abortion may be an effective way to increase awareness of medication abortion and influence beliefs about medication abortion safety.

Support for criminalization of self-managed abortion (SMA): A national representative survey.

OBJECTIVE: Since the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated the federal right to abortion, there is a heightened need to understand public opinion about the criminalization of people who attempt to end their pregnancies outside the formal healthcare setting, referred to as self-managed abortion (SMA). We assessed U.S. attitudes about whether three forms of SMA should be legal, reported or punished: 1) using abortion pills obtained outside the healthcare system, 2) using other medications, drugs, herbs, or by drinking alcohol, and 3) using traumatic methods (inserting an object in their body or hitting their stomach). METHODS: From December 2021 to January 2022, we administered a national probability-based online survey to English- and Spanish-speaking people assigned female (AFAB, ages 15-49) or male at birth (AMAB, ages 18-49) regarding their attitudes about criminalizing SMA, using Ipsos' KnowledgePanel. We estimated weighted proportions and conducted multivariable regression analyses to identify characteristics associated with support for SMA legality and punishment (reporting to authorities, paying a fine or going to jail). RESULTS: A total of 7,016 AFAB and 360 AMAB completed the survey. People were less likely (p < .05) to agree that SMA using abortion pills should be illegal (34% of AFAB and 43% of AMAB) than other forms of SMA (36-48%), although over one-fifth were unsure (AFAB, 20-23% and AMAB, 24-27%). People were less likely to agree SMA using abortion pills should be criminalized than SMA using other drugs, medications, herbs, alcohol or by using traumatic methods. In multivariable analyses, AMAB and Christian religion were associated with agreeing that SMA using abortion pills should be illegal; people who identified as Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and experienced medical mistreatment were less likely to agree SMA with medication abortion pills should be illegal. CONCLUSIONS: Public support for criminalizing SMA is complex and varied by SMA method and form of punishment.

Access to Reproductive Health Services Among People With Disabilities.

Importance: People with disabilities face inequitable access to reproductive health (RH) services, yet the national prevalence of barriers to access experienced across disability types and statuses is unknown. Objective: To assess the national prevalence of barriers to RH access experienced by people with disabilities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed results of an online probability-based national survey of RH experiences that was conducted from December 2021 to January 2022. The national sample consisted of English- and Spanish-speaking panel members of a market research firm. Panelists were invited to participate in a survey on their RH experiences and opinions. These participants were aged 15 to 49 years and assigned female at birth (AFAB). Weighted proportions were estimated, and bivariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess associations between disability status and barriers to accessing RH services. Exposure: Using 5 of the 6 Washington Group Short Set on Functioning items, 8 dichotomous disability indicators were created: (1) vision, (2) hearing, (3) mobility, (4) activities of daily living, (5) communication, (6) overall disability status (a lot or more difficulty functioning in ≥1 domain), (7) some difficulty functioning (below the disability threshold; some or more difficulty functioning in ≥1 domain), and (8) multiple disabilities (a lot or more difficulty functioning in ≥2 domains). Main Outcomes and Measures: Number and types of barriers (logistical, access, cost, privacy, and interpersonal relationship) to accessing RH services in the past 3 years. Results: After exclusion, the final sample included 6956 people AFAB, with a mean (SD) age of 36.0 (8.3) years. Of these participants, 8.5% (95% CI, 7.6%-9.5%) met the disability threshold. Participants with disabilities compared with those without disabilities were disproportionately more likely to be non-Hispanic Black (18.8% [95% CI, 14.4%-24.1%] vs 13.2% [95% CI, 11.9%-14.5%]) or Hispanic or Latinx (completed survey in English: 18.1% [95% CI, 14.0%-23.0%] vs 14.6% [95% CI, 13.3%-16.0%]; completed survey in Spanish: 8.9% [95% CI, 6.2%-12.8%] vs 6.2% [95% CI, 5.4%-7.1%]) individuals, to identify as LGBTQAI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer [or questioning], asexual [or allied], intersex; 16.4% [95% CI, 12.3%-21.6%] vs 11.8% [95% CI, 10.6%-13.1%]), to live below the federal poverty level (27.3% [95% CI, 22.3%-32.8%] vs 10.7% [95% CI, 9.7%-11.9%]), and to ever experienced medical mistreatment (49.6% [95% CI, 43.7%-55.5%] vs 36.5% [95% CI, 34.8%-38.2%]). Among those who had ever tried to access RH services (n = 6027), people with disabilities vs without disabilities were more likely to experience barriers (69.0% [95% CI, 62.9%-74.5%] vs 43.0% [95% CI, 41.2%-44.9%]), which were most often logistical (50.7%; 95% CI, 44.2%-57.2%) and access (49.9%; 95% CI, 43.4%-56.4%) barriers. The disability domains with the highest proportion of people who experienced 3 or more barriers in the past 3 years included activities of daily living (75.3%; 95% CI, 61.1%-85.6%), communication (65.1%; 95% CI, 49.5%-78.1%), and multiple (59.9%; 95% CI, 45.6%-72.7%) disabilities. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found large disparities in access to RH services among people AFAB with disabilities. Findings indicated a need to alleviate barriers to RH care, including improving the transportation infrastructure and reinforcing patient-centered approaches that engender inclusivity in health care settings.

Awareness of medication abortion among a nationally representative U.S. sample, 2021-2022.

OBJECTIVES: Assess public awareness of medication abortion in the U.S. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in 2021-2022 with a probability-based sample, calculating the prevalence of medication abortion awareness and assessing its associations with participant characteristics using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 45% of adults (7201/16,113) and 49% of eligible 15-17-year-old females (175/358) invited completed the survey. In all, 64% of 6992 participants assigned female at birth, and 57% of 360 participants assigned male reported awareness of medication abortion. Race, age, education, poverty level, religion, sexual identity, abortion history, and attitudes toward abortion legality were associated with differences in awareness. CONCLUSIONS: Medication abortion awareness differs by participant groups and is critical for expanding abortion access. IMPLICATIONS: Tailored health information for groups with less awareness of medication abortion may help spread knowledge of the method and how to access it.

Changes in the Frequency and Type of Barriers to Reproductive Health Care Between 2017 and 2021.

Importance: Previous research has documented individual-level barriers to reproductive health services, but few studies have examined national trends. Objective: To determine whether the number and type of barriers to reproductive health care experienced by US women of reproductive age changed from 2017 to 2021. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used serial survey data, weighted to be nationally representative, collected in August 2017 and December 2021 from members of Ipsos's KnowledgePanel who were aged 18 to 49 years and assigned female at birth. Exposures: Having experienced barriers to reproductive health care over the past 3 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was number and type of barriers to reproductive health care services, including Papanicolaou tests or birth control, experienced in the past 3 years. Increases in barriers to reproductive health care were measured using multivariable linear regressions adjusted for age, race and ethnicity, education level, employment status, metropolitan area, geographic region, household income, and language (English vs Spanish). Results: Of 29 496 KnowledgePanel members invited, 7022 (mean [SD] age, 33.9 [9.0] years) and 6841 (mean [SD] age, 34.2 [8.6] years) completed the 2017 and 2021 surveys (50% and 45% response rates, respectively). Among 12 351 participants who indicated that they had ever tried accessing reproductive health services, 35.9% (95% CI, 34.8%-37.0%) were aged 30 to 39 years; 5.5% (95% CI, 4.9%-6.2%) were Asian or Pacific Islander, 13.7% (95% CI, 12.8%-14.6%) were Black, 19.1% (95% CI, 18.1%-20.1%) were Hispanic, 58.2% (95% CI, 57.0%-59.5%) were White, and 3.5% (95% CI, 3.1%-4.0%) were multiracial or of other race or ethnicity; and 11.7% (95% CI, 11.0%-12.5%) were living below 100% of the federal poverty level. Covariate distribution was similar across years. In bivariable analyses, participants were more likely to report experiencing a given barrier in the past 3 years in 2021 than in 2017 for all but 2 barriers. More people experienced 3 or more barriers in 2021 (18.6%; 95% CI, 17.3%-20.0%) than in 2017 (16.1%; 95% CI, 14.9%-17.4%) (P = .008). In multivariable analyses, the mean number of barriers increased significantly from 1.09 (95% CI, 1.02-1.14) in 2017 to 1.29 (95% CI, 1.22-1.37) (P < .001) in 2021. Participants who were aged 25 to 29 years (0.42; 95% CI, 0.37-0.47), identified as Hispanic (0.41; 95% CI, 0.38-0.45), had no high school diploma or General Educational Development test (0.62; 95% CI, 0.53-0.72), lived below 100% of the federal poverty level (0.65; 95% CI, 0.55-0.73), and took the survey in Spanish (0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-1.01) saw the greatest increases in mean number of barriers between 2017 and 2021. Conclusions and Relevance: The study findings suggest that barriers to reproductive health care increased between 2017 and 2021, with the largest increases observed among individuals from historically disadvantaged populations. Efforts are needed to ensure that reproductive health care access remains a priority.

Educational Intervention Among Adolescents and Young Adults on Emergency Contraception Options.

PURPOSE: Emergency contraception (EC), the 'last chance' contraceptive method, has gained significance post-Roe, but most young people do not know their options. METHODS: We conducted an educational intervention on EC among 1,053 students aged 18-25 years. We assessed changes in knowledge of key aspects of EC using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: At baseline, virtually no one was aware of the intrauterine device for EC (4%), but postintervention, 89% correctly identified intrauterine devices as the most effective EC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 116.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 62.4, 217.8). Knowledge that levonorgestrel pills could be accessed without a prescription grew (60%-90%; aOR = 9.7, 95% CI 6.7-14.0), as did knowledge that pills work best when taken as soon as possible (75%-95%; aOR = 9.6, 95% CI 6.1-14.9). Multivariate results showed adolescent and young adult participants absorbed these key concepts across age, gender, and sexual orientation. DISCUSSION: Timely interventions are needed to empower youth with knowledge of EC options.

Geographic disparities in disruptions to abortion care in Louisiana at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Prior research identified a significant decline in the number of abortions in Louisiana at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as increases in second-trimester abortions and decreases in medication abortions. This study examines how service disruptions in particular areas of the state disparately affected access to abortion care based on geography. STUDY DESIGN: We collected monthly service data from Louisiana's abortion clinics (January 2018-May 2020) and conducted mystery client calls to determine whether clinics were scheduling appointments at pandemic onset (April-May 2020). We used segmented regression to assess whether service disruptions modified the main pandemic effects on the number, timing, and type of abortions using stratified models and interaction terms. Additionally, we calculated the median distance that Louisiana residents traveled to the clinic where they obtained care. RESULTS: For residents whose closest clinic was consistently scheduling appointments at the onset of the pandemic, the number of monthly abortions did not change (IRR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.84-1.36). For those whose closest clinic services were disrupted, the number of monthly abortions decreased by 46% (IRR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.45-0.65). Similarly, increases in second-trimester abortions and decreases in medication abortions were concentrated in areas where residents experienced service disruptions (AOR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.21-4.56 and AOR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.29-0.87, respectively) and were not seen elsewhere in the state. CONCLUSION: Changes in the number, timing and type of abortions were concentrated among residents in particular areas of Louisiana. The early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated geographic disparities in access to abortion care. IMPLICATIONS: Disruptions in services at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in Louisiana meaningfully affected pregnant people's ability to obtain an abortion at their nearest clinic. These findings reinforce the importance of developing mechanisms to support pregnant people during emergency situations when traveling to a nearby clinic is no longer possible.

An Educational Intervention to Raise Awareness of Contraceptive Options Among Young People.

Background: Young people in the United States know little about contraceptive options available to them, although method use is sensitive to individual preferences, and method switching is common. For young people to gain reproductive autonomy, a first step is to be aware of different contraceptives, including hormonal and nonhormonal methods. We tested whether an educational intervention delivered on community college campuses was effective in increasing contraceptive awareness. Materials and Methods: We developed a low-cost educational intervention featuring youth-friendly visual tools and tested its impact on method awareness and knowledge among 1,051 students of all genders, aged 18-25 years, at five community colleges. We used generalized estimating equations to test changes in awareness of a range of methods, including male and female (internal) condoms, the pill, patch, vaginal ring, shot, intrauterine devices, implant, and emergency contraception. Results: Over 90% of participants were aware of male condoms and the pill at baseline, but fewer had heard of other options (ranging from 31% to 76% for different methods). Across all methods, awareness increased to a mean of 88% among female participants and 82% among male participants postintervention. Awareness of the full range of methods increased from 31% to 55% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 4.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1-6.2]) among female participants and 11% to 36% (aOR: 10.8, 95% CI: 5.3-21.8) among male participants postintervention. The intervention was similarly effective by sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, nativity, or insurance coverage. Conclusion: This educational intervention significantly improved all students' awareness of a range of contraceptives, supporting one important aspect of reproductive health for young people in community settings.

COVID-19, health care, and abortion exceptionalism in the United States.

CONTEXT: Few qualitative findings have been published that explore and identify the challenges experienced by independent abortion providers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States (US). In this paper, we explore these themes while expanding the concept of "abortion exceptionalism" beyond its original legal meaning to address the impact of abortion stigma. METHODS: Twenty abortion providers from independent abortion clinics throughout the US South and Midwest participated in semi-structured interviews in June and July 2020. Interviews explored the challenges of providing abortion care in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and sought to identify how clinics strategized and amended their clinical practices to continue providing abortion care during this time. RESULTS: All providers we spoke to noted significant challenges to providing abortion care in the early days of COVID-19. In addition to experiencing the same concerns as other health care institutions, abortion clinics also faced additional, unique burdens that can only be attributed to the politics of abortion exceptionalism. Examples of this abortion exceptionalism include abrupt orders to close clinics, the need to rely on traveling physicians, legislature-imposed limits on telemedicine, heightened activities of protesters, and non-evidence-based regulation of medication abortion. CONCLUSION: Despite major challenges and differential treatment, independent abortion clinics in the US persevered to continue to provide abortion care throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Disruptions to Abortion Care in Louisiana During Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objectives. To examine changes in abortions in Louisiana before and after the COVID-19 pandemic onset and assess whether variations in abortion service availability during this time might explain observed changes. Methods. We collected monthly service data from abortion clinics in Louisiana and neighboring states among Louisiana residents (January 2018‒May 2020) and assessed changes in abortions following pandemic onset. We conducted mystery client calls to 30 abortion clinics in Louisiana and neighboring states (April‒July 2020) and examined the percentage of open and scheduling clinics and median waits. Results. The number of abortions per month among Louisiana residents in Louisiana clinics decreased 31% (incidence rate ratio = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.59, 0.79) from before to after pandemic onset, while the odds of having a second-trimester abortion increased (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.10, 3.33). The decrease was not offset by an increase in out-of-state abortions. In Louisiana, only 1 or 2 (of 3) clinics were open (with a median wait > 2 weeks) through early May. Conclusions. The COVID-19 pandemic onset was associated with a significant decrease in the number of abortions and increase in the proportion of abortions provided in the second trimester among Louisiana residents. These changes followed service disruptions.

Concerns About the Cost of Contraception Among Young Women Attending Community College.

INTRODUCTION: Contraceptive use is lower among students attending community college than 4-year college students, which may be due to financial barriers to accessing contraceptives. This study examined insurance coverage, access to free or low-cost birth control, and concerns about contraceptive costs among women in community college. METHODS: We analyzed data from a study conducted at five community colleges in California and Oregon, which have expanded Medicaid coverage of family planning services for low-income individuals. Participants were students aged 18-25 years who self-identified as female, had vaginal sex, and were not pregnant or trying to become pregnant (N = 389). Multivariate analyses were conducted to examine concerns about the cost of contraception among these young women and how cost concerns varied by insurance coverage and access to free or low-cost birth control. RESULTS: Nearly one-half of participants (49%) were concerned about the cost of contraception. In multivariate models, privately insured women had lower odds of being concerned about the cost of birth control than the uninsured (adjusted odds ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.83), yet women with public insurance had cost concerns similar to those of women without insurance. Women who reported they knew where to get free or low-cost birth control had lower odds of reporting cost concerns (adjusted odds ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.75), as did the few women enrolled in a state family planning program (adjusted odds ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Even in states with publicly funded services for young people, concerns about the affordability of contraception were common among women, particularly the uninsured or publicly insured. Addressing students' cost concerns is an important aspect of ensuring access to contraception during their pursuit of higher education.

Improving Capacity at School-based Health Centers to Offer Adolescents Counseling and Access to Comprehensive Contraceptive Services.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Many pediatric providers serving adolescents are not trained to offer comprehensive contraceptive services, including intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants, despite high safety and satisfaction among adolescents. This study assessed an initiative to train providers at school-based health centers (SBHCs) to offer students the full range of contraceptive methods. DESIGN: Surveys were administered at baseline pre-training and at follow-up 3 months post-training. Data were analyzed using generalized estimating equations for clustered data to examine clinical practice changes. SETTING: Eleven contraceptive trainings at SBHCs across the United States from 2016-2019. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 260 providers from 158 SBHCs serving 135,800 students. INTERVENTIONS: On-site training to strengthen patient-centered counseling and to equip practitioners to integrate IUDs and implants into contraceptive services. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcomes included counseling experience on IUDs and implants, knowledge of patient eligibility, and clinician method skills. RESULTS: At follow-up, providers were significantly more likely to report having enough experience to counsel on IUDs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.62-6.36]) and implants (aOR, 3.06; 95% CI, 2.05-4.57). Provider knowledge about patient eligibility for IUDs, including for adolescents, increased (P < .001). Providers were more likely to offer same-visit IUD (aOR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.41-3.12) and implant services (aOR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.44-1.91). Clinicians' skills with contraceptive devices improved, including for a newly available low-cost IUD (aOR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.45-3.36). CONCLUSIONS: Offering evidence-based training is a promising approach to increase counseling and access to comprehensive contraceptive services at SBHCs.

COVID-19 and Independent Abortion Providers: Findings from a Rapid-Response Survey.

CONTEXT: The ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic has affected abortion providers and abortion care, and the strategies clinics are adopting to navigate the pandemic, have not been well documented. METHODS: In April-May 2020, representatives from 103 independent abortion clinics (i.e., those not affiliated with Planned Parenthood) completed a survey that included close-ended questions about how the pandemic, the public health response, and designations of abortion as a nonessential service had affected their clinic, as well as open-ended questions about the pandemic's impact. Analyses were primarily descriptive but included an exploration of regional variation. RESULTS: All U.S. regions were represented in the sample. At 51% of clinics, clinicians or staff had been unable to work because of the pandemic or public health responses. Temporary closures were more common among clinics in the South (35%) and Midwest (21%) than in the Northeast and West (5% each). More than half of clinics had canceled or postponed nonabortion services (e.g., general gynecologic care); cancelation or postponement of abortion services was less common (25-38%, depending on type) and again especially prevalent in the South and Midwest. Respondents reported the pandemic had had numerous effects on their clinics, including disrupting their workforce, clinic flow and work practices; increasing expenses; and reducing revenues. State laws (including designations of abortion as nonessential) had exacerbated these difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: Although independent abortion clinics have faced considerable challenges from the pandemic, most continued to provide abortion care. Despite this resiliency, additional support may be needed to ensure sustainability of these clinics.

Adoption of no-test and telehealth medication abortion care among independent abortion providers in response to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Access to abortion care in the United States (US) is restricted by numerous logistical and financial barriers, which have been further intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to understand the ways in which COVID-19 prompted changes in clinical practices in abortion care among independent abortion clinics. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed independent US abortion clinics and documented changes in practice regarding the provision of abortion since March 1, 2020. RESULTS: Among about 153 independent clinics invited, 100 clinics contributed relevant data and were included in the analytic sample. A total of 87% reported changes in protocols in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Reported changes included moving to telehealth (phone or video) for follow-up (71%), starting or increasing telehealth for patient consultations and screening (41%), reducing Rh testing (43%) and other tests (42%), and omitting the preabortion ultrasound (15%). A total of 20% reported allowing quick pickup of medication abortion pills, and 4% began mailing medications directly to patients after a telehealth consultation. Clinical practice changes were reported throughout all regions of the US, but facilities in the Northeast (73%) were more likely to report starting or increasing telehealth than facilities in the South (23%, p < .001). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated use of telehealth among independent abortion clinics, but many clinics, particularly those in the South, have been unable to make these changes. Other practices such as reducing preabortion ultrasounds were less common in all regions despite clinical guidelines and evidence supporting such changes in practice and positive benefits for public health and patient-centered care. IMPLICATIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has created a window of opportunity to remove barriers to abortion, including expanding telehealth and reducing preabortion tests. Clinics can strive for a culture shift towards simplifying the provision of medication abortion and routinely avoiding preabortion tests and in-person visits. Such changes in practice could have positive benefits for public health and patient-centered care.

Experiences of harassment and empowerment after sharing personal abortion stories publicly.

OBJECTIVE: In recent years, in an attempt to counter stigma and increase empathy, public education campaigns have encouraged people to share their personal abortion stories. This exploratory study sought to document negative and positive experiences of those who have shared their abortion stories publicly. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an anonymous online survey of people who have shared their abortion story publicly (N = 88), recruited via partners affiliated with two abortion story-sharing campaigns. The survey asked about the context in which respondents shared their abortion story, any negative and positive experiences online and in "real life" as a result of story sharing, and any problems or benefits resulting from these experiences. We analyzed survey data using descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses and categorizing responses to open-ended questions. RESULTS: Sixty percent of respondents reported experiencing harassment and other negative incidents after sharing their story publicly. These experiences contributed to emotional stress, problems with loved ones and difficulties at work and/or school. These harms were reported even by many respondents who used only a first name or alias when sharing their story. Despite this, positive experiences as a result of story sharing were reported by four out of five respondents and motivated many to continue sharing their story. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study indicates that many people who share their abortion story publicly find it to be an empowering, rewarding experience. Yet they also experience harassment and threats at high rates. Future research should explore both positive and negative experiences in more depth. IMPLICATIONS: Sharing one's personal abortion story as part of a public education campaign can be a positive, empowering experience. Nevertheless, policymakers, journalists and reproductive health advocates should recognize the potential harms experienced by people who share their abortion story publicly and consider measures to support these individuals.

Pregnancy Intentions, Contraceptive Knowledge And Educational Aspirations Among Community College Students.

CONTEXT: Community college students, representing more than one-third of U.S. undergraduates, are a diverse population of young people motivated to seek higher education who are at elevated risk of unintended pregnancy. However, it is unknown how well prepared they are to prevent pregnancy and what they think about it in terms of their educational aspirations. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with 57 students aged 18-25, inclusive of all genders, in three community colleges in California in 2015. Content analysis was used to code data and identify themes. RESULTS: All participants reported strong desires to prevent pregnancy in the next year and perceived their pregnancy risk as low, but many reported unprotected sex with opposite-sex partners. Participants had specific timelines for completing their degrees and believed pregnancy would make that far more challenging, but would not ultimately prevent them from achieving their goals. Female students expressed concern about the risks of exacerbated poverty, housing instability and unachieved career goals. Participants had little knowledge of their pregnancy risks and of the health benefits, side effects or effectiveness of contraceptives. They held negative beliefs about hormonal contraception (including emergency contraception, IUDs and the implant), fearing long-lasting effects and infertility. Gay or bisexual students shared concerns about contraceptives, although several were using methods for noncontraceptive reasons. CONCLUSION: Many community college students not desiring pregnancy have limited awareness of pregnancy risk and prevention.

Women's knowledge and attitudes surrounding abortion in Zambia: a cross-sectional survey across three provinces.

OBJECTIVES: In Zambia, despite a relatively liberal legal framework, there remains a substantial burden of unsafe abortion. Many women do not use skilled providers in a well-equipped setting, even where these are available. The aim of this study was to describe women's knowledge of the law relating to abortion and attitudes towards abortion in Zambia. SETTING: Community-based survey in Central, Copperbelt and Lusaka provinces. PARTICIPANTS: 1484 women of reproductive age (15-44 years). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Correct knowledge of the legal grounds for abortion, attitudes towards abortion services and the previous abortions of friends, family or other confidants. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression were used to analyse how knowledge and attitudes varied according to sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, just 16% (95% CI 11% to 21%) of women of reproductive age correctly identified the grounds for which abortion is legal. Only 40% (95% CI 32% to 45% of women of reproductive age knew that abortion was legally permitted in the extreme situation where the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother. Even in urban areas of Lusaka province, only 55% (95% CI 41% to 67%) of women knew that an abortion could legally take place to save the mother's life. Attitudes remain conservative. Women with correct knowledge of abortion law in Zambia tended to have more liberal attitudes towards abortion and access to safe abortion services. Neither correct knowledge of the law nor attitudes towards abortion were associated with knowing someone who previously had an induced abortion. CONCLUSIONS: Poor knowledge and conservative attitudes are important obstacles to accessing safe abortion services. Changing knowledge and attitudes can be challenging for policymakers and public health practitioners alike. Zambia could draw on its previous experience in dealing with its large HIV epidemic to learn cross-cutting lessons in effective mass communication on what is a difficult and sensitive issue.