Abstract
Purpose
States have enacted an increasing number of policies restricting access to abortion.
As a result, some women are unable to obtain an abortion and instead continue their
pregnancies. These women may have particular needs that would bring them to the attention
of public health programs.
Methods
Pregnant women entering prenatal care completed a self-administered survey and structured
interview at four prenatal facilities in Louisiana and Maryland (N = 586). Participants reported their pregnancy intentions, whether they had considered
abortion, and their reasons for not having an abortion (e.g., personal reasons, policy
barriers to care). Participants completed up to 13 items indicating their service
needs; an index was created by summing across nine common items. Data were analyzed
through descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses, and multivariable regression models
that controlled for sociodemographic characteristics.
Results
On average, women reported 2.99 service needs. The most common needs were WIC (93%),
food stamps (85%), dental care (59%), and housing assistance (53%). In multivariable
analyses, women who considered abortion but did not face a policy barrier reported
greater service needs compared to women who did not consider abortion (3.45 vs. 2.82;
b = 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.25–1.04). Women reporting a policy barrier to
abortion reported the highest service needs (3.95) of all groups, although differences
were not statistically significant possibly owing to sample size.
Conclusions
Pregnant women who consider abortion before entering prenatal care have considerable
health and social service needs. Public health programs that serve women and children
should consider the specific needs of women who seek abortions.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Women's Health IssuesAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Conceptualisation, development, and evaluation of a measure of unplanned pregnancy.Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 2004; 58: 426-433
- State and local health department activities related to abortion: A web site content analysis.Journal of Public Health Management and Practice. 2018; 24: 255-262
- Should prenatal care providers offer pregnancy options counseling?.BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2018; 18: 384
- Understanding why women seek abortions in the US.BMC Womens Health. 2013; 13: 29
- Women's mental health and well-being 5 years after receiving or being denied an abortion: A prospective, longitudinal cohort study.JAMA Psychiatry. 2017; 74: 169-178
- The 10 essential public health services: An overview.(Available:)https://www.cdc.gov/publichealthgateway/publichealthservices/pdf/essential-phs.pdfDate: 2014Date accessed: July 3, 2019
- The role of intimate partners in women's reasons for seeking abortion.Womens Health Issues. 2014; 24: e131-e138
- MCH functions framework: A guide to the role of government in maternal and child health in the 21st century.Maternal and Child Health Journal. 1997; 1: 5-13
- Declines in unintended pregnancy in the United States, 2008-2011.New England Journal of Medicine. 2016; 374: 843-852
- Comparison of health, development, maternal bonding, and poverty among children born after denial of abortion vs after pregnancies subsequent to an abortion.JAMA Pediatrics. 2018; 172: 1053-1060
- Socioeconomic outcomes of women who receive and women who are denied wanted abortions in the United States.American Journal of Public Health. 2018; 108: 407-413
- Side effects, physical health consequences, and mortality associated with abortion and birth after an unwanted pregnancy.Womens Health Issues. 2016; 26: 55-59
- Change in abortion services after implementation of a restrictive law in Texas.Contraception. 2014; 90: 496-501
- An overview of abortion laws.Guttmacher Institute, New York2019 (Available:)https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abortion-lawsDate accessed: July 3, 2019
- Restrictions on Medicaid funding for abortions: A literature review.Guttmacher Institute, New York2009 (Available:)https://www.guttmacher.org/report/restrictions-medicaid-funding-abortions-literature-reviewDate accessed: July 3, 2019
- Relying on surveys to understand abortion behavior: Some cautionary evidence.American Journal of Public Health. 2001; 91: 1825-1831
- Abortion incidence and service availability In the United States, 2014.Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. 2017; 49: 17-27
- The prevalence and impacts of crisis pregnancy center visits among a population of pregnant women.Contraception. 2018; 98: 69-73
- Reasons women give for abortion: A review of the literature.Archives of Womens Mental Health. 2009; 12: 365-378
- Policy trends in the states, 2017.Guttmacher Institute, New York2018 (Available:)https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2018/01/policy-trends-states-2017Date accessed: July 3, 2019
- Norms and stigma regarding pregnancy decisions during an unintended pregnancy: Development and predictors of scales among young women in the U.S. South.PLoS One. 2017; 12: e0174210
- Risk of violence from the man involved in the pregnancy after receiving or being denied an abortion.BMC Medicine. 2014; 12: 144
- A 21st-century public health approach to abortion.American Journal of Public Health. 2017; 107: 1878-1882
- Changes in alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use over five years after receiving versus being denied a pregnancy termination.Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. 2018; 79: 293-301
- Consideration of and reasons for not obtaining abortion among women entering prenatal care in Southern Louisiana and Baltimore, Maryland.Sexuality Research and Social Policy. 2018;
- Denial of abortion because of provider gestational age limits in the United States.American Journal of Public Health. 2014; 104: 1687-1694
- Catalyzing a reproductive health and social justice movement.Maternal and Child Health Journal. 2016; 20: 741-748
Biography
Nancy F. Berglas, DrPH, is a public health social scientist at Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health at the University of California, San Francisco.
Biography
Katrina Kimport, PhD, is an Associate Professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences and qualitative sociologist at Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, both at the University of California, San Francisco.
Biography
Valerie Williams, MD, is an Obstetrician/Gynecologist and Assistant Professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center.
Biography
Katrina Mark, MD, is an Obstetrician/Gynecologist and Assistant Professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine.
Biography
Sarah C.M. Roberts, DrPH, is an Associate Professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences and a public health social scientist at Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, both at the University of California, San Francisco.
Article info
Publication history
Published online: August 03, 2019
Accepted:
July 3,
2019
Received in revised form:
July 3,
2019
Received:
January 11,
2019
Footnotes
Supported by research grants from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation. The sponsors had no involvement in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication. The authors report no financial conflicts of interest.
Identification
Copyright
© 2019 Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. Published by Elsevier Inc.
