Angel M Foster1, Kathryn J LaRoche2, Julie El-Haddad3, Lauren DeGroot4, Ieman M El-Mowafi5. 1. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. Electronic address: angel.foster@uottawa.ca. 2. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 3. Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 4. Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 5. Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: New Brunswick (NB)'s Regulation 84-20 has historically restricted funded abortion care to procedures deemed medically necessary by two physicians and performed in a hospital by an obstetrician-gynecologist. However, on January 1, 2015, the provincial government amended the regulation and abolished the "two physician rule." OBJECTIVES: We aimed to document women's experiences obtaining abortion care in NB before and after the Regulation 84-20 amendment; identify the economic and personal costs associated with obtaining abortion care; and examine the ways in which geography, age and language-minority status condition access to care. METHODS: We conducted 33 semistructured telephone interviews with NB residents who had abortions between 2009 and 2014 (n=27) and after January 1, 2015 (n=6), in English and French. We audiorecorded and transcribed all interviews and conducted content and thematic analyses using ATLAS.ti software to manage our data. RESULTS: The cost of travel is significant for NB residents trying to access abortion services. Women reported significant wait times which impacted the disclosure of their pregnancy and the gestational age at the time of the abortion. Further, many women reported that physicians refused to provide referrals for abortion care. Even after the amendment to 84-20, all participants reported that they were required to have two physicians approve their procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The funding restrictions for abortion care in NB represent a profound inequity. Amending Regulation 84-20 was an important step but failed to address the fundamental issue that clinic-based abortion care is not funded and significant barriers to access persist. IMPLICATIONS: NB's policies create unnecessary barriers to accessing timely and affordable abortion care and produce a significant health inequity for women in the province. Further policy reforms are required to ensure that women are able to get the abortion care to which they are entitled.
INTRODUCTION: New Brunswick (NB)'s Regulation 84-20 has historically restricted funded abortion care to procedures deemed medically necessary by two physicians and performed in a hospital by an obstetrician-gynecologist. However, on January 1, 2015, the provincial government amended the regulation and abolished the "two physician rule." OBJECTIVES: We aimed to document women's experiences obtaining abortion care in NB before and after the Regulation 84-20 amendment; identify the economic and personal costs associated with obtaining abortion care; and examine the ways in which geography, age and language-minority status condition access to care. METHODS: We conducted 33 semistructured telephone interviews with NB residents who had abortions between 2009 and 2014 (n=27) and after January 1, 2015 (n=6), in English and French. We audiorecorded and transcribed all interviews and conducted content and thematic analyses using ATLAS.ti software to manage our data. RESULTS: The cost of travel is significant for NB residents trying to access abortion services. Women reported significant wait times which impacted the disclosure of their pregnancy and the gestational age at the time of the abortion. Further, many women reported that physicians refused to provide referrals for abortion care. Even after the amendment to 84-20, all participants reported that they were required to have two physicians approve their procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The funding restrictions for abortion care in NB represent a profound inequity. Amending Regulation 84-20 was an important step but failed to address the fundamental issue that clinic-based abortion care is not funded and significant barriers to access persist. IMPLICATIONS: NB's policies create unnecessary barriers to accessing timely and affordable abortion care and produce a significant health inequity for women in the province. Further policy reforms are required to ensure that women are able to get the abortion care to which they are entitled.
Authors: Brittany Moore; Cheri Poss; Ernestina Coast; Samantha R Lattof; Yana van der Meulen Rodgers Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 3.240
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
Authors: Samantha R Lattof; Ernestina Coast; Yana van der Meulen Rodgers; Brittany Moore; Cheri Poss Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-11-04 Impact factor: 3.240