Advancing Birth Equity in a Post-<i>Dobbs</i> US

Crear-Perry, Joia; Hassan, Asha; Daniel, Sara

doi:10.1001/jama.2022.19468

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fear of legal ramifications, moral injury, and inadequate surgical training may lead to the siphoning of talented trainees to areas in the country with fewer restrictions. 3 Dobbs already has demonstrated how limiting abortion access will deepen inequities in reproductive health care service delivery. Approximately 55% of ObGyn trainees and nearly two-thirds of maternal-fetal medicine graduates join the workforce in the state where they received their training.…”

Section: How the Dobbs Decision Shapes The Obgyn Workforce And Traini...mentioning

confidence: 99%

How the Dobbs decision shapes the ObGyn workforce and training landscape

Nandi¹

2023

OBGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: How the Dobbs Decision Shapes The Obgyn Workforce And Traini...mentioning

confidence: 99%

How the Dobbs decision shapes the ObGyn workforce and training landscape

Nandi¹

2023

OBGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This history contextualizes the legacy linking abortion access with reproductive justice, as well as birth equity. 16…”

Section: Historymentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics, Abortion Access, and Emergency Care Post‐Dobbs: The Gray Areas

Tillman,

Eagen‐Torkko,

Levi

2023

J Midwife Womens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical management of emergency pregnancy care, such as ectopic pregnancy or heavy bleeding with pregnancy of unknown location, includes upholding legal and ethical standards. For health care providers unwilling to provide evidence‐based life‐saving abortion care due to personal beliefs, clear guidance dictates disclosure of these limitations to the patient and colleagues, followed by immediate referral for appropriate care. However, this decision‐making pathway may not be engaged due to a variety of factors: providers’ beliefs preclude adherence to referral responsibilities, political discourse confuses patients as to their options and rights, and a constantly changing state and national legal landscape leads providers to question their ability to practice to their full scope of clinical care. Although this disruption of evidence‐based standard of care existed pre‐Dobbs, the moral disorder is now heightened. This Clinical Rounds highlights a patient vignette describing the risks of abortion restrictions for patients and providers alike, particularly when an individual provider's concerns for violating institutional guidelines sets a precedent for nursing response and forecloses on collaborative input or ethics consultation. The history of physician‐only abortion exceptionalism and exclusion of nurses and midwives despite a significant history of nurses and midwives in abortion care grounds an argument for focusing on the impact of unethical and substandard care on the interprofessional care team leading to moral distress and negative patient outcomes. Patient‐centered models of care, such as frameworks common in nursing and midwifery, offer opportunities to consider how all providers practicing to their full scope in interprofessional and collaborative ways, such as in emergency rooms and labor departments, might mitigate obstructions to abortion care that risk pregnant people's lives.

show abstract

“…; Grace & Anderson, 2018). While behaviors that reduce the likelihood of pregnancy occurring are equally as concerning in how they limit victims' reproductive autonomy, pregnancy-promoting forms of reproductive coercion may carry serious reproductive health consequences for victims who become pregnant when they do not want to be given recent legislation that has limited access to abortion care in the United States (Crear-Perry et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproductive Coercion and Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration Among Young Adult Males

Muñoz,

Le,

Shorey

et al. 2023

Violence Against Women

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reproductive coercion is any behavior that attempts to control the autonomous reproductive decision-making of an intimate partner. Very little research has focused on males who perpetrate reproductive coercion. Using a diverse community sample of young adults, we examined the prevalence of lifetime reproductive coercion perpetration and its relationship with other forms of intimate partner violence (IPV). Results demonstrated that approximately 6.4% of the men reported perpetrating reproductive coercion in their lifetime. Chi-square analyses demonstrated that men who reported sexual (16.2%), physical (11.1%), or psychological (59.1%) IPV perpetration, relative to men who did not, reported a significantly higher prevalence of reproductive coercion perpetration.

show abstract

Advancing Birth Equity in a Post-Dobbs US

Cited by 15 publications

References 7 publications

How the Dobbs decision shapes the ObGyn workforce and training landscape

How the Dobbs decision shapes the ObGyn workforce and training landscape

Ethics, Abortion Access, and Emergency Care Post‐Dobbs: The Gray Areas

Reproductive Coercion and Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration Among Young Adult Males

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About