Crisis Pregnancy Centers

Stettner, Shannon

doi:10.4135/9781412995962.n193

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kristin Hawkins, the president of Students for Life of America, concurs, noting that the movement has had a “mainly…offensive” post- Roe strategy waiting to be rolled out for the last fifteen years. “Now,” Hawkins says, “is when the rubber will meet the road” (Ollstein, 2021).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Presence and absence: Crisis pregnancy centers and abortion facilities in the contemporary reproductive justice landscape

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article uses driving time to examine the geographic relationship of abortion facilities to crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) in terms of race/ethnicity and population density. We analyze both the current reproductive justice landscape and predict how this landscape will change following the projected reversal of Roe v. Wade. Our results demonstrate that disparities in the presence of abortion facilities and CPCs manifest in terms of rural/urban classification and race/ethnicity. These disparities will become more pronounced in the post- Roe landscape. Four major findings include: 1.) Following the projected reversal of Roe, the ratio of abortion facilities to CPCs will change from 1:3 to 1:5; 2.) the number of people who live closer to a CPC than an abortion facility will nearly double post- Roe; 3.) people in rural areas live in disproportionate proximity to CPCs, although the number of people in large metropolitan areas living closer to a CPC than an abortion facility will increase nearly four-fold post- Roe; 4.) compared to other racial and ethnic groups, a greater percentage of Native Americans live closer to a CPC than an abortion facility and the share of Black and Hispanic/Latino people who live closer to a CPC than an abortion facility will more than double post- Roe. Ultimately, our results push scholars, advocates, and policy makers to discuss access to reproductive healthcare and reproductive justice in terms of presence of CPCs as much as absence of abortion facilities.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Happily, the Church is leading with a new initiative to meet the increased needs of mothers and children in a post- Roe world” (Ferguson, 2022). An article in Politico similarly notes that “anti-abortion groups, anticipating an increase in unwanted pregnancies, are…promoting faith-based crisis pregnancy centers” (Ollstein, 2021).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Presence and absence: Crisis pregnancy centers and abortion facilities in the contemporary reproductive justice landscape

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Spatial Analyses of Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Abortion Facilities in the United States, 2021: Pre-Dobbs Cross-Sectional Study (Preprint)

Swartzendruber,

Luisi,

Johnson

et al. 2024

JMIR Public Health and Surveillance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) are religious non-profit organizations that have a primary mission of diverting people from having abortions. For decades, one tactic used by CPCs has been to locate near abortion facilities. Despite medical groups' warnings that CPCs do not adhere to medical and ethical standards and pose risks to individual and public health, government support for CPCs has significantly increased over the past decade.Objective: This study aimed to map CPCs, abortion facilities, and geographic areas in the United States (US) categorized into four zones defined by their proximity to CPCs and abortion facilities in 2021. We also sought to describe the number and percentage of reproductive-aged women living in each zone and the proximity of CPCs to abortion facilities. Methods:Using 2021 data from CPC Map and the Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) Abortion Facility Database, we determined the ratio of CPCs to abortion facilities. Using these sources and Census data, we categorized and mapped US block groups into four distinct zones based on the locations of block group centroids within 15-mile radii of CPCs and abortion facilities: 1) no presence, 2) CPC only, 3) abortion facility only, and 4) dual presence. We used summary statistics to calculate the number and percentage of block groups and reproductive-aged (15-49 years) women living in each zone. We also calculated distances and drive times from abortion facilities to the nearest CPC. All analyses were conducted nationally and by region, division, and state. We used chi-square statistics to test for differences by region and division in the number of block groups and women classified to each zone.Results: Nationally, the ratio of CPCs to abortion facilities was 3.4, and 55% of block groups were categorized in the "dual presence" zone, 27% as "CPC only," and 0.8% in the "abortion facility only" zone. Most (60%) reproductive-aged women lived in a "dual presence" zone, 26% in a "CPC only", and 0.8% lived in an "abortion facility only" zone. We detected statistically significant variations (p<0.001) in the number of block groups and women classified as living in each zone by region and division. Nationally, the median distance from abortion facilities to the nearest CPC was 2 miles, and the median drive time was 5.5 minutes. Minimum drive times were <1 minute in all but 11 states. Conclusions:The findings suggest that CPCs' tactic of locating near abortion facilities was largely realized before the 2022 US Supreme Court decision that overturned the federal right to abortion. Research on CPCs' locations and tactics should continue given the dynamic abortion policy landscape and risks posed by CPCs. Tailored programming to raise awareness about CPCs and help people identify and access safe sources of healthcare may mitigate harm.

show abstract

Spatial Analyses of Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Abortion Facilities in the United States, 2021 (Preprint)

Swartzendruber,

Luisi,

Johnson

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) are religious non-profit organizations that have a primary mission of diverting people from having abortions. For decades, one tactic used by CPCs has been to locate near abortion facilities. Despite medical groups’ warnings that CPCs do not adhere to medical and ethical standards and pose risks to individual and public health, government support for CPCs has significantly increased over the past decade. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to map CPCs, abortion facilities, and geographic areas in the United States (US) categorized into four zones defined by their proximity to CPCs and abortion facilities in 2021. We also sought to describe the number and percentage of reproductive-aged women living in each zone and the proximity of CPCs to abortion facilities. METHODS Using 2021 data from CPC Map and the Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) Abortion Facility Database, we determined the ratio of CPCs to abortion facilities. Using these sources and Census data, we categorized and mapped US block groups into four distinct zones based on the locations of block group centroids within 15-mile radii of CPCs and abortion facilities: 1) no presence, 2) CPC only, 3) abortion facility only, and 4) dual presence. We used summary statistics to calculate the number and percentage of block groups and reproductive-aged (15-49 years) women living in each zone. We also calculated distances and drive times from abortion facilities to the nearest CPC. All analyses were conducted nationally and by region, division, and state. We used chi-square statistics to test for differences by region and division in the number of block groups and women classified to each zone. RESULTS Nationally, the ratio of CPCs to abortion facilities was 3.4, and 55% of block groups were categorized in the “dual presence” zone, 27% as “CPC only,” and 0.8% in the “abortion facility only” zone. Most (60%) reproductive-aged women lived in a “dual presence” zone, 26% in a “CPC only”, and 0.8% lived in an “abortion facility only” zone. We detected statistically significant variations (p<0.001) in the number of block groups and women classified as living in each zone by region and division. Nationally, the median distance from abortion facilities to the nearest CPC was 2 miles, and the median drive time was 5.5 minutes. Minimum drive times were <1 minute in all but 11 states. CONCLUSIONS The findings suggest that CPCs’ tactic of locating near abortion facilities was largely realized before the 2022 US Supreme Court decision that overturned the federal right to abortion. Research on CPCs’ locations and tactics should continue given the dynamic abortion policy landscape and risks posed by CPCs. Tailored programming to raise awareness about CPCs and help people identify and access safe sources of healthcare may mitigate harm.

show abstract

Crisis Pregnancy Centers

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Presence and absence: Crisis pregnancy centers and abortion facilities in the contemporary reproductive justice landscape

Presence and absence: Crisis pregnancy centers and abortion facilities in the contemporary reproductive justice landscape

Spatial Analyses of Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Abortion Facilities in the United States, 2021: Pre-Dobbs Cross-Sectional Study (Preprint)

Spatial Analyses of Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Abortion Facilities in the United States, 2021 (Preprint)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About