<scp>COVID</scp>‐19 Abortion Bans and Their Implications for Public Health

Jones, Rachel K.; Lindberg, Laura Duberstein; Witwer, Elizabeth

doi:10.1363/psrh.12139

Cited by 46 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The designation of abortion as an "elective" procedure allowed states that actively restrict abortion to immediately cut off access to this time-sensitive procedure. 15 Our challenge as health care providers is to identify gaps in access that affect-intentionally or not-the SRH care that our patients need, and to advocate for changing policies that exacerbate gaps in access and outcomes. Cataloging (identifying and tracking) gaps will allow us to address barriers in access and worsening disparities in outcomes, as restrictions loosen.…”

Section: Clinician Perspectives On Ethics and Covid-19: Minding The Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the right to SRH extends to adolescents, 25 young people' s ability to obtain care confidentially has been hindered during the COVID-19 pandemic by restrictions on personal movement and by reduced availability of inperson care. 15 Without confidentiality, adolescents are less likely to ask sensitive questions, disclose sexual health needs or obtain SRH care. 26,27 In many states, minors must obtain parental permission or court approval (often called a judicial bypass) to terminate a pregnancy.…”

Section: Human Rights Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinician Perspectives on Ethics and COVID‐19: Minding the Gap in Sexual and Reproductive Health

Ott

Bernard

Wilkinson

et al. 2020

Perspect Sexual Reproductive

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Clinician Perspectives On Ethics and Covid-19: Minding The Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Human Rights Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinician Perspectives on Ethics and COVID‐19: Minding the Gap in Sexual and Reproductive Health

Ott

Bernard

Wilkinson

et al. 2020

Perspect Sexual Reproductive

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Yet since 2011, states have enacted over 480 laws regulating abortion and restricting access to services including abortion bans in 12 states in 2019 [2,3]. As of May 2020, 11 states had attempted to restrict abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Women's knowledge of their state's abortion regulations. A national survey

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: States vary significantly in their regulation of abortion. Misinformation about abortion is pervasive and propagated by state-mandated scripts that contain abortion myths. We sought to investigate women's knowledge of abortion laws in their state. Our secondary objective was to describe women's ability to discern myths about abortion from facts about abortion. Study design: This was a cross-sectional study of English-and Spanish-speaking women aged 18-49 in the United States. We enrolled members of the GfK KnowledgePanel, a probability-based, nationallyrepresentative online sample. Our primary outcome was the proportion of correct answers to 12 questions about laws regulating abortion in a respondent's state. We asked five questions about common abortion myths. We used descriptive statistics to characterize performance on these measures and bivariate and multivariate modeling to identify risk factors for poor knowledge of state abortion laws. Results: Of 2223 women contacted, 1057 (48%) completed the survey. The mean proportion of correct answers to 12 law questions was 18% (95% CI 17-20%). For three of five assessed myths, women endorsed myths about abortion over facts. Those who believe abortion should be illegal (aOR 2.18, CI 1.40-3.37), and those living in states with neutral or hostile state policies toward abortion (neutral aOR 1.99, CI 1.34-2.97; hostile aOR 1.6, CI 1.07-2.36) were at increased odds of poor law knowledge. Conclusions: Women had low levels of knowledge about state abortion laws and commonly endorse abortion myths. Women's knowledge of their state's abortion laws was associated with personal views about abortion and their state policy environment. Implications: Supporters of reproductive rights can use these results to show policy makers that their constituents are unlikely to know about laws being passed that may profoundly affect them. These findings underscore the potential benefit in correcting widely-held, medically-inaccurate beliefs about abortion so opinions about laws can be based on fact.

show abstract

“…For example, in Maryland in the US, the FDA requirement that mifepristone be dispensed in person was recently successfully challenged, and an injunction is in place (at the time of writing) that prevents the FDA from enforcing this requirement in Maryland. 41 Other countries, however, have failed to act appropriately to (temporarily) remove pre-existing legal barriers to TEMA implicitly labelling abortion services as non-essential in failing to adapt. In some countries, governments have attempted to exploit the pandemic to effectively ensure access to abortion at clinics is even more difficult by explicitly adopting measures that label abortion care 'non-essential'.…”

Section: Regulation and Policy Changes During Covid-19mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There have also been some successful legal challenges to policies that prevent access at this time. For example, in Maryland in the US, the FDA requirement that mifepristone be dispensed in person was recently successfully challenged, and an injunction is in place (at the time of writing) that prevents the FDA from enforcing this requirement in Maryland 41 …”

Section: Legal and Policy Context Of Abortion Care During Covid‐19mentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal and policy responses to the delivery of abortion care during COVID‐19

Romanis

Parsons

2020

Intl J Gynecology & Obste

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Access to abortion care has long been a global challenge, even in jurisdictions where abortion is legal. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated barriers to access, thereby preventing many women from terminating unwanted pregnancies for an extended period. In this paper, we outline existing and COVID-specific barriers to abortion care and consider potential solutions, including the use of telemedicine, to overcome barriers to access during the pandemic and beyond. We explore the responses of governments throughout the world to the challenge of abortion access during the pandemic, which are an eclectic mix of progressive, neutral, and regressive policies. Finally, we call on all governments to recognize abortion as essential healthcare and act to ensure that the law does not continue to interfere with providers' ability to adapt to circumstances and to guarantee safe and appropriate care not only during the pandemic, but permanently.

show abstract

COVID‐19 Abortion Bans and Their Implications for Public Health

Cited by 46 publications

References 19 publications

Clinician Perspectives on Ethics and COVID‐19: Minding the Gap in Sexual and Reproductive Health

Clinician Perspectives on Ethics and COVID‐19: Minding the Gap in Sexual and Reproductive Health

Women's knowledge of their state's abortion regulations. A national survey

Legal and policy responses to the delivery of abortion care during COVID‐19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About