Kari White1, Katelin Adams2, Kristine Hopkins3. 1. Department of Health Care Organization and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2(nd) Ave South RPHB 320, Birmingham, AL, 35294. Electronic address: kariwhite@uab.edu. 2. Department of Health Care Organization and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2(nd) Ave South RPHB 320, Birmingham, AL, 35294. 3. Population Research Center and the Department of Sociology, University of Texas at Austin, 305 E. 23rd Street, Stop G1800, Austin, TX, 78712.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare pregnancy options counseling and referral practices at state- and Title X-funded family planning organizations in Texas after enforcement of a policy restricting abortion referrals for providers participating in state-funded programs, which differed from Title X guidelines to provide referrals for services upon request. STUDY DESIGN: Between November 2014 and February 2015, we conducted in-depth interviews with administrators at publicly funded family planning organizations in Texas about how they integrated primary care and family planning services, including pregnancy options counseling and referrals for unplanned pregnancies. We conducted a thematic analysis of transcripts related to organizations' pregnancy options counseling and referral practices, and compared themes across organizations that did and did not receive Title X funding. RESULTS: Of the 37 organizations with transcript segments on options counseling and referrals, 15 received Title X and 22 relied on state funding only. All Title X-funded organizations but only nine state-funded organizations reported offering pregnancy options counseling. Respondents at state-only-funded organizations often described directing pregnant women exclusively to prenatal care. Regardless of funding source, most organizations provided women a list of agencies offering abortion, adoption and prenatal care. However, some respondents expressed concern that providing other information about abortion would threaten their state funding. In contrast, respondents indicated staff would make appointments for prenatal care, assist with Medicaid applications and, in some instances, directly connect women with adoption-related services. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy options counseling varied by organizations' funding guidelines. Additionally, abortion referrals were less common than referrals for other pregnancy-related care. IMPLICATIONS: Programmatic guidelines restricting information on abortion counseling and referrals may adversely affect care for pregnant women at publicly funded family planning organizations.
OBJECTIVES: To compare pregnancy options counseling and referral practices at state- and Title X-funded family planning organizations in Texas after enforcement of a policy restricting abortion referrals for providers participating in state-funded programs, which differed from Title X guidelines to provide referrals for services upon request. STUDY DESIGN: Between November 2014 and February 2015, we conducted in-depth interviews with administrators at publicly funded family planning organizations in Texas about how they integrated primary care and family planning services, including pregnancy options counseling and referrals for unplanned pregnancies. We conducted a thematic analysis of transcripts related to organizations' pregnancy options counseling and referral practices, and compared themes across organizations that did and did not receive Title X funding. RESULTS: Of the 37 organizations with transcript segments on options counseling and referrals, 15 received Title X and 22 relied on state funding only. All Title X-funded organizations but only nine state-funded organizations reported offering pregnancy options counseling. Respondents at state-only-funded organizations often described directing pregnant women exclusively to prenatal care. Regardless of funding source, most organizations provided women a list of agencies offering abortion, adoption and prenatal care. However, some respondents expressed concern that providing other information about abortion would threaten their state funding. In contrast, respondents indicated staff would make appointments for prenatal care, assist with Medicaid applications and, in some instances, directly connect women with adoption-related services. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy options counseling varied by organizations' funding guidelines. Additionally, abortion referrals were less common than referrals for other pregnancy-related care. IMPLICATIONS: Programmatic guidelines restricting information on abortion counseling and referrals may adversely affect care for pregnant women at publicly funded family planning organizations.
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
Authors: Kelsey Holt; Elizabeth Janiak; Marie C McCormick; Ellice Lieberman; Christine Dehlendorf; Sandhya Kajeepeta; Jacquelyn M Caglia; Ana Langer Journal: Fam Med Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 1.756
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