Literature DB >> 26768858

Women's experiences seeking abortion care shortly after the closure of clinics due to a restrictive law in Texas.

Liza Fuentes1, Sharon Lebenkoff2, Kari White3, Caitlin Gerdts2, Kristine Hopkins4, Joseph E Potter4, Daniel Grossman5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In 2013, Texas passed legislation restricting abortion services. Almost half of the state's clinics had closed by April 2014, and there was a 13% decline in abortions in the 6 months after the first portions of the law went into effect, compared to the same period 1 year prior. We aimed to describe women's experiences seeking abortion care shortly after clinics closed and document pregnancy outcomes of women affected by these closures. STUDY
DESIGN: Between November 2013 and November 2014, we recruited women who sought abortion care at Texas clinics that were no longer providing services. Some participants had appointments scheduled at clinics that stopped offering care when the law went into effect; others called seeking care at clinics that had closed. Texas resident women seeking abortion in Albuquerque, New Mexico, were also recruited.
RESULTS: We conducted 23 in-depth interviews and performed a thematic analysis. As a result of clinic closures, women experienced confusion about where to go for abortion services, and most reported increased cost and travel time to obtain care. Having to travel farther for care also compromised their privacy. Eight women were delayed more than 1 week, two did not receive care until they were more than 12 weeks pregnant and two did not obtain their desired abortion at all. Five women considered self-inducing the abortion, but none attempted this.
CONCLUSIONS: The clinic closures resulted in multiple barriers to care, leading to delayed abortion care for some and preventing others from having the abortion they wanted. IMPLICATIONS: The restrictions on abortion facilities that resulted in the closure of clinics in Texas created significant burdens on women that prevented them from having desired abortions. These laws may also adversely affect public health by moving women who would have had abortions in the first trimester to having second-trimester procedures.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abortion; Abortion restrictions; Policy evaluation; Qualitative; Texas

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26768858      PMCID: PMC4896137          DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2015.12.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contraception        ISSN: 0010-7824            Impact factor:   3.375


  10 in total

1.  Self-induction of abortion among women in the United States.

Authors:  Daniel Grossman; Kelsey Holt; Melanie Peña; Diana Lara; Maggie Veatch; Denisse Córdova; Marji Gold; Beverly Winikoff; Kelly Blanchard
Journal:  Reprod Health Matters       Date:  2010-11

2.  Abortion-seeking minors' views on the Illinois parental notification law: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Erin K Kavanagh; Lee A Hasselbacher; Brittany Betham; Sigrid Tristan; Melissa L Gilliam
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2012-07-02

3.  Change in abortion services after implementation of a restrictive law in Texas.

Authors:  Daniel Grossman; Sarah Baum; Liza Fuentes; Kari White; Kristine Hopkins; Amanda Stevenson; Joseph E Potter
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 3.375

4.  The concept of access: definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction.

Authors:  R Penchansky; J W Thomas
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1981-02       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Side Effects, Physical Health Consequences, and Mortality Associated with Abortion and Birth after an Unwanted Pregnancy.

Authors:  Caitlin Gerdts; Loren Dobkin; Diana Greene Foster; Eleanor Bimla Schwarz
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2015-11-11

6.  Women's perspectives on ultrasound viewing in the abortion care context.

Authors:  Katrina Kimport; Felisa Preskill; Kate Cockrill; Tracy A Weitz
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2012-10-05

7.  Abortion-Related Mortality in the United States: 1998-2010.

Authors:  Suzanne Zane; Andreea A Creanga; Cynthia J Berg; Karen Pazol; Danielle B Suchdev; Denise J Jamieson; William M Callaghan
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  Risk of violence from the man involved in the pregnancy after receiving or being denied an abortion.

Authors:  Sarah Cm Roberts; M Antonia Biggs; Karuna S Chibber; Heather Gould; Corinne H Rocca; Diana Greene Foster
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2014-09-29       Impact factor: 8.775

9.  Secondary measures of access to abortion services in the United States, 2011 and 2012: gestational age limits, cost, and harassment.

Authors:  Jenna Jerman; Rachel K Jones
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug

10.  The effect of abortion on having and achieving aspirational one-year plans.

Authors:  Ushma D Upadhyay; M Antonia Biggs; Diana Greene Foster
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 2.809

  10 in total
  33 in total

1.  Factors associated with abortion at 12 or more weeks gestation after implementation of a restrictive Texas law.

Authors:  Vinita Goyal; Robin Wallace; Amna I Dermish; Bhavik Kumar; Ann Schutt-Ainé; Anitra Beasley; Abigail R A Aiken
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  A 21st-Century Public Health Approach to Abortion.

Authors:  Sarah C M Roberts; Liza Fuentes; Nancy F Berglas; Amanda J Dennis
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2017-10-19       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Women's Knowledge of and Support for Abortion Restrictions in Texas: Findings from a Statewide Representative Survey.

Authors:  Kari White; Joseph E Potter; Amanda J Stevenson; Liza Fuentes; Kristine Hopkins; Daniel Grossman
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2016-04-15

4.  Change in Second-Trimester Abortion After Implementation of a Restrictive State Law.

Authors:  Kari White; Sarah E Baum; Kristine Hopkins; Joseph E Potter; Daniel Grossman
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Barriers to Abortion Care and Their Consequences For Patients Traveling for Services: Qualitative Findings from Two States.

Authors:  Jenna Jerman; Lori Frohwirth; Megan L Kavanaugh; Nakeisha Blades
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2017-04-10

6.  "It just seemed like a perfect storm": A multi-methods feasibility study on the use of Facebook, Google Ads, and Reddit to collect data on abortion-seeking experiences from people who considered but did not obtain abortion care in the United States.

Authors:  Heidi Moseson; Jane W Seymour; Carmela Zuniga; Alexandra Wollum; Anna Katz; Terri-Ann Thompson; Caitlin Gerdts
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Abortion During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Racial Disparities and Barriers to Care in the USA.

Authors:  Taida Wolfe; Yana van der Meulen Rodgers
Journal:  Sex Res Social Policy       Date:  2021-03-22

8.  Counseling and referrals for women with unplanned pregnancies at publicly funded family planning organizations in Texas.

Authors:  Kari White; Katelin Adams; Kristine Hopkins
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 3.375

9.  Rebound of medication abortion in Texas following updated mifepristone label.

Authors:  Sarah E Baum; Kari White; Kristine Hopkins; Joseph E Potter; Daniel Grossman
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 3.375

Review 10.  The microeconomics of abortion: A scoping review and analysis of the economic consequences for abortion care-seekers.

Authors:  Ernestina Coast; Samantha R Lattof; Yana van der Meulen Rodgers; Brittany Moore; Cheri Poss
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.