Abigail R A Aiken1, Kathleen Broussard2, Dana M Johnson3, Elisa Padron4. 1. Assistant professor, LBJ School of Public Affairs, and faculty research associate, Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin. 2. Graduate student, Department of Sociology, and graduate research trainee, Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin. 3. Graduate student, LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin. 4. Undergraduate student, College of Natural Sciences, University of Texas at Austin.
Abstract
CONTEXT: State legislation restricting access to abortion in the clinic setting raises the possibility that an increasing number of individuals in the United States will self-manage their abortion at home. Medications sourced online represent a potential pathway to abortion self-management. Yet, very little is known about the reasons U.S. residents may seek abortion online or their experiences finding medications and information. METHODS: In January-June 2017, anonymous in-depth interviews were conducted with 32 people from 20 states who sought abortion medications online (30 women and two men seeking medications for their partners). Participants were asked about their (or their partners') motivations for considering self-managed abortion, the sources of medications they identified and any other methods they considered. Transcripts were coded and analyzed according to the principles of grounded theory. RESULTS: The analysis revealed four key themes: Seeking abortion medications online can be a response to clinic access barriers both in states with and in ones without restrictive abortion laws; self-managed abortion can be a preference over clinical care; online options offer either information or medications, but not both; and the lack of trusted online options can delay care and lead to consideration of ineffective or unsafe alternatives. CONCLUSION: Current online options for abortion medications leave many important needs unmet, particularly for women who encounter barriers to obtaining clinic-based abortion services. There is a public health justification to reduce clinic access barriers and to make medication abortion that is sourced online and managed at home as safe and supported as possible.
CONTEXT: State legislation restricting access to abortion in the clinic setting raises the possibility that an increasing number of individuals in the United States will self-manage their abortion at home. Medications sourced online represent a potential pathway to abortion self-management. Yet, very little is known about the reasons U.S. residents may seek abortion online or their experiences finding medications and information. METHODS: In January-June 2017, anonymous in-depth interviews were conducted with 32 people from 20 states who sought abortion medications online (30 women and two men seeking medications for their partners). Participants were asked about their (or their partners') motivations for considering self-managed abortion, the sources of medications they identified and any other methods they considered. Transcripts were coded and analyzed according to the principles of grounded theory. RESULTS: The analysis revealed four key themes: Seeking abortion medications online can be a response to clinic access barriers both in states with and in ones without restrictive abortion laws; self-managed abortion can be a preference over clinical care; online options offer either information or medications, but not both; and the lack of trusted online options can delay care and lead to consideration of ineffective or unsafe alternatives. CONCLUSION: Current online options for abortion medications leave many important needs unmet, particularly for women who encounter barriers to obtaining clinic-based abortion services. There is a public health justification to reduce clinic access barriers and to make medication abortion that is sourced online and managed at home as safe and supported as possible.
Authors: Kelli Stidham Hall; Sara Redd; Subasri Narasimhan; Elizabeth A Mosley; Sophie A Hartwig; Emily Lemon; Erin Berry; Eva Lathrop; Lisa B Haddad; Roger Rochat; Carrie Cwiak Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2020-05-21 Impact factor: 11.561
Authors: Abigail R A Aiken; Jennifer E Starling; Alexandra van der Wal; Sascha van der Vliet; Kathleen Broussard; Dana M Johnson; Elisa Padron; Rebecca Gomperts; James G Scott Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2019-10-17 Impact factor: 11.561
Authors: Abigail R A Aiken; Kathleen Broussard; Dana M Johnson; Elisa Padron; Jennifer E Starling; James G Scott Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2020-03-03 Impact factor: 10.693
Authors: Liza Fuentes; Sarah Baum; Brianna Keefe-Oates; Kari White; Kristine Hopkins; Joseph Potter; Daniel Grossman Journal: BMC Womens Health Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 2.809