ABORTION PATIENTS’ AWARENESS AND UNDERSTANDING OF AN EARLY PREGNANCY ABORTION BAN AND ACCESS TO IN-STATE CARE

IF 2.8 2区医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY

Contraception Pub Date : 2024-10-07 DOI:10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110612

K White, W Arey, AD Beasley, A Chatillon, C Chadwick, A Dane’el, O Leyser-Whalen, T Weitz

{"title":"ABORTION PATIENTS’ AWARENESS AND UNDERSTANDING OF AN EARLY PREGNANCY ABORTION BAN AND ACCESS TO IN-STATE CARE","authors":"K White, W Arey, AD Beasley, A Chatillon, C Chadwick, A Dane’el, O Leyser-Whalen, T Weitz","doi":"10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110612","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Explore We aimed to explore pregnant Texans’ awareness and understanding of a 2021 state law prohibiting abortion after detectable embryonic cardiac activity when navigating to abortion care.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We recruited Texans who obtained out-of-state abortion care after implementation of Senate Bill 8 (SB8) by providing flyers to abortion facilities in seven states and using online ads. Between October 2021 and February 2022, we conducted in-depth telephone interviews with English-speaking participants ≥15 years of age to explore their experiences seeking care. We used inductive and deductive codes in our thematic analysis describing participants’ understanding of how the law limited abortions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Most of the 65 participants discovered their pregnancy soon after a missed period, and less than half had heard of SB8 prior to pregnancy. Those who identified their pregnancy early and heard SB8 changed when an abortion could be obtained described the stress of scheduling appointments to confirm whether they could secure in-state care; a few felt rushed to make a decision. Having heard SB8 described as a six-week ban, participants were upset and frustrated to learn they were ineligible for in-state care because clinicians dated their pregnancy from weeks since last menstrual period (vs conception), there was evidence of cardiac activity before six weeks gestation, or cardiac activity appeared between ultrasound visits.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Pregnant Texans’ limited awareness of SB8 and the disjuncture between their understanding of the law and how it applied in early pregnancy increased time pressures and logistical burdens during their process seeking abortion care.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10762,"journal":{"name":"Contraception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001078242400307X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Explore We aimed to explore pregnant Texans’ awareness and understanding of a 2021 state law prohibiting abortion after detectable embryonic cardiac activity when navigating to abortion care.

Methods

We recruited Texans who obtained out-of-state abortion care after implementation of Senate Bill 8 (SB8) by providing flyers to abortion facilities in seven states and using online ads. Between October 2021 and February 2022, we conducted in-depth telephone interviews with English-speaking participants ≥15 years of age to explore their experiences seeking care. We used inductive and deductive codes in our thematic analysis describing participants’ understanding of how the law limited abortions.

Results

Most of the 65 participants discovered their pregnancy soon after a missed period, and less than half had heard of SB8 prior to pregnancy. Those who identified their pregnancy early and heard SB8 changed when an abortion could be obtained described the stress of scheduling appointments to confirm whether they could secure in-state care; a few felt rushed to make a decision. Having heard SB8 described as a six-week ban, participants were upset and frustrated to learn they were ineligible for in-state care because clinicians dated their pregnancy from weeks since last menstrual period (vs conception), there was evidence of cardiac activity before six weeks gestation, or cardiac activity appeared between ultrasound visits.

Conclusions

Pregnant Texans’ limited awareness of SB8 and the disjuncture between their understanding of the law and how it applied in early pregnancy increased time pressures and logistical burdens during their process seeking abortion care.

查看原文本刊更多论文

堕胎患者对早孕堕胎禁令的认识和理解，以及获得州内护理的机会

目标探索我们旨在探索德克萨斯州孕妇在接受人工流产护理时对 2021 年禁止在检测到胚胎心脏活动后进行人工流产的州法律的认识和理解。方法我们通过向七个州的人工流产机构提供传单和使用在线广告，招募了在参议院第 8 号法案（SB8）实施后获得州外人工流产护理的德克萨斯人。2021 年 10 月至 2022 年 2 月期间，我们对年龄≥15 岁的英语参与者进行了深入的电话访谈，以了解他们寻求护理的经历。我们在主题分析中使用了归纳和演绎代码，描述了参与者对法律如何限制堕胎的理解。结果65 名参与者中的大多数人在月经错过后不久发现自己怀孕，不到一半的人在怀孕前听说过 SB8。那些很早就发现自己怀孕并听说 SB8 法案改变了堕胎时间的参与者描述了她们在安排预约以确认是否能获得州内医疗服务时所承受的压力；少数人感到急于做出决定。在听说 SB8 被描述为六周禁令后，参与者在得知自己没有资格获得州内护理时感到不安和沮丧，因为临床医生根据末次月经（与受孕）后的周数来确定其怀孕时间，有证据表明在妊娠六周前出现心脏活动，或在超声波检查之间出现心脏活动。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Contraception 医学-妇产科学

CiteScore

4.70

自引率

17.20%

发文量

211

审稿时长

69 days

期刊介绍： Contraception has an open access mirror journal Contraception: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review. The journal Contraception wishes to advance reproductive health through the rapid publication of the best and most interesting new scholarship regarding contraception and related fields such as abortion. The journal welcomes manuscripts from investigators working in the laboratory, clinical and social sciences, as well as public health and health professions education.