{"title":"“I Wasn't Expecting That Question”: Responses to Requests for Abortion Referral at College Student Health Centers","authors":"Priyanka Anand MD , Licia Bravo BS , Sarah Gutman MD, MSPH , Arden McAllister MPH , Shimrit Keddem PhD , Sarita Sonalkar MD, MPH","doi":"10.1016/j.whi.2023.12.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Women 18–24 years of age have the highest proportion of unintended pregnancies of any age group, and thus represent a significant population in need of abortion services. Prior research indicated that only half of college student health centers provide appropriate abortion referrals. Our objective was to better understand the referral experience and barriers to abortion referral at college student health centers.</p></div><div><h3>Procedures</h3><p>We conducted a “secret caller” study at all 4-year colleges in Pennsylvania between June 2017 and April 2018, using a structured script requesting abortion referral. Calls were transcribed, coded using an iteratively developed codebook, and analyzed for themes related to barriers and facilitators of abortion referral.</p></div><div><h3>Main Findings</h3><p>A total of 202 completed transcripts were reviewed. Themes that emerged were knowledge, experience, and comfort with abortion referral; support, empathy, and reassurance<span><span>; coercion; misleading language; questioning the caller's </span>autonomy; and institutional policy against referral. Most staff lacked knowledge and comfort with abortion referral. Although some staff members made supportive statements toward the caller, others used coercive language to try to dissuade the caller from an abortion. Many staff cited religious institutional policies against abortion referral and expressed a range of feelings about such policies.</span></p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Abortion referrals at student health centers lack consistency. Staff members frequently did not have the knowledge needed to provide appropriate abortion referrals, used coercive language in responding to requests for referrals, and perpetuated abortion stigma. Some health staff used coercive or evasive language that further stigmatized the caller's request for an abortion referral. College health centers should improve training and resources around abortion referral to ensure they are delivering appropriate, high-quality care.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48039,"journal":{"name":"Womens Health Issues","volume":"34 2","pages":"Pages 148-155"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Womens Health Issues","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1049386723002141","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Women 18–24 years of age have the highest proportion of unintended pregnancies of any age group, and thus represent a significant population in need of abortion services. Prior research indicated that only half of college student health centers provide appropriate abortion referrals. Our objective was to better understand the referral experience and barriers to abortion referral at college student health centers.
Procedures
We conducted a “secret caller” study at all 4-year colleges in Pennsylvania between June 2017 and April 2018, using a structured script requesting abortion referral. Calls were transcribed, coded using an iteratively developed codebook, and analyzed for themes related to barriers and facilitators of abortion referral.
Main Findings
A total of 202 completed transcripts were reviewed. Themes that emerged were knowledge, experience, and comfort with abortion referral; support, empathy, and reassurance; coercion; misleading language; questioning the caller's autonomy; and institutional policy against referral. Most staff lacked knowledge and comfort with abortion referral. Although some staff members made supportive statements toward the caller, others used coercive language to try to dissuade the caller from an abortion. Many staff cited religious institutional policies against abortion referral and expressed a range of feelings about such policies.
Conclusions
Abortion referrals at student health centers lack consistency. Staff members frequently did not have the knowledge needed to provide appropriate abortion referrals, used coercive language in responding to requests for referrals, and perpetuated abortion stigma. Some health staff used coercive or evasive language that further stigmatized the caller's request for an abortion referral. College health centers should improve training and resources around abortion referral to ensure they are delivering appropriate, high-quality care.
期刊介绍：
Women"s Health Issues (WHI) is a peer-reviewed, bimonthly, multidisciplinary journal that publishes research and review manuscripts related to women"s health care and policy. As the official journal of the Jacobs Institute of Women"s Health, it is dedicated to improving the health and health care of all women throughout the lifespan and in diverse communities. The journal seeks to inform health services researchers, health care and public health professionals, social scientists, policymakers, and others concerned with women"s health.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
