Not actively dying: An inductive categorization of obstetric cases negatively affected by post-Dobbs abortion bans

IF 2.3 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Katrina Kimport, Shelly Kaller
{"title":"Not actively dying: An inductive categorization of obstetric cases negatively affected by post-Dobbs abortion bans","authors":"Katrina Kimport,&nbsp;Shelly Kaller","doi":"10.1016/j.contraception.2025.111043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study aimed to document categories of patient scenarios wherein the timing of pregnancy-related care in the United States has been negatively affected despite the risk of health harms by post-<em>Dobbs</em> abortion laws.</div></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><div>Between November 2022 and October 2024, we conducted semistructured phone interviews with 36 health care professionals in the United States who were involved in care for a pregnant patient who did not receive the standard of care due to post-<em>Dobbs</em> laws. We analyzed the interviews using a flexible coding approach and grounded theory.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified three categories of patient scenarios wherein care that clinicians judged necessary to prevent or reduce future health harm was delayed or denied: patients who had an existing health condition whose severity was exacerbated by pregnancy; patients for whom the pregnancy itself was the health condition clinicians anticipated would lead to medical endangerment or death; and serious fetal health conditions that would result in inevitable fetal or infant death. In all three, the absence of a current life-threatening emergency — even when one was near certain in the future — prevented clinicians from offering abortion care and increased the risk of health harms.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Restrictive post-<em>Dobbs</em> laws’ inflexible focus on the patient’s and/or fetus’s current health status prevented clinicians from using their knowledge and experience to prevent future health harms, turning clinical care for pregnancy into an exclusively reactive practice. These laws reorient care for pregnant patients to only allow interventions based on present health and, in effect, prohibit care that will prevent or reduce future harm.</div></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><div>Restrictive post-<em>Dobbs</em> laws change the practice of obstetric medicine and constrain clinicians’ ability to offer pregnant patients care that will prevent or reduce future harm, illustrating a concerning policy outcome and highlighting the health dangers of these laws.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10762,"journal":{"name":"Contraception","volume":"151 ","pages":"Article 111043"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-25","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/S0010782425002343","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

This study aimed to document categories of patient scenarios wherein the timing of pregnancy-related care in the United States has been negatively affected despite the risk of health harms by post-Dobbs abortion laws.

Study design

Between November 2022 and October 2024, we conducted semistructured phone interviews with 36 health care professionals in the United States who were involved in care for a pregnant patient who did not receive the standard of care due to post-Dobbs laws. We analyzed the interviews using a flexible coding approach and grounded theory.

Results

We identified three categories of patient scenarios wherein care that clinicians judged necessary to prevent or reduce future health harm was delayed or denied: patients who had an existing health condition whose severity was exacerbated by pregnancy; patients for whom the pregnancy itself was the health condition clinicians anticipated would lead to medical endangerment or death; and serious fetal health conditions that would result in inevitable fetal or infant death. In all three, the absence of a current life-threatening emergency — even when one was near certain in the future — prevented clinicians from offering abortion care and increased the risk of health harms.

Conclusions

Restrictive post-Dobbs laws’ inflexible focus on the patient’s and/or fetus’s current health status prevented clinicians from using their knowledge and experience to prevent future health harms, turning clinical care for pregnancy into an exclusively reactive practice. These laws reorient care for pregnant patients to only allow interventions based on present health and, in effect, prohibit care that will prevent or reduce future harm.

Implications

Restrictive post-Dobbs laws change the practice of obstetric medicine and constrain clinicians’ ability to offer pregnant patients care that will prevent or reduce future harm, illustrating a concerning policy outcome and highlighting the health dangers of these laws.
不主动死亡:受多布斯后堕胎禁令负面影响的产科病例归纳分类。
目的:记录患者的情况类别,其中怀孕相关护理的时机在美国已经受到负面影响,尽管健康危害的风险后多布斯堕胎法。研究设计:在2022年11月至2024年10月期间,我们对36名美国医疗保健专业人员进行了半结构化的电话访谈,这些专业人员参与了一名因后多布斯法而未得到标准护理的孕妇的护理。我们使用灵活的编码方法和扎根理论来分析访谈。结果:我们确定了三类患者情况,其中临床医生认为预防或减少未来健康危害所必需的护理被延迟或拒绝:患者已有健康状况,其严重程度因怀孕而加剧;妊娠本身是临床医生预期的健康状况,将导致医疗危险或死亡的患者;严重的胎儿健康状况会导致不可避免的胎儿或婴儿死亡。在这三种情况下,当前没有危及生命的紧急情况——即使将来几乎肯定会出现这种情况——会阻止临床医生提供堕胎护理,并增加健康危害的风险。结论:限制性后多布斯法对患者和/或胎儿当前健康状况的僵化关注,使临床医生无法利用他们的知识和经验来预防未来的健康危害,使临床妊娠护理成为一种专门的反应性实践。这些法律将对怀孕患者的护理重新定位为只允许基于目前健康状况的干预措施,实际上禁止能够预防或减少未来伤害的护理。影响:限制性后多布斯法律改变了产科医学的实践,限制了临床医生为怀孕患者提供预防或减少未来伤害的护理的能力,说明了一个令人担忧的政策结果,并强调了这些法律对健康的危害。
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
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信