Effects of the Dobbs decision on abortion and related service provision among sexual and reproductive health clinics in the United States: results from a qualitative study.
IF 3.3 2区 医学Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Jennifer Mueller, Sidney Cech, Octavia Mulhern, Alicia VandeVusse
{"title":"Effects of the <i>Dobbs</i> decision on abortion and related service provision among sexual and reproductive health clinics in the United States: results from a qualitative study.","authors":"Jennifer Mueller, Sidney Cech, Octavia Mulhern, Alicia VandeVusse","doi":"10.1080/26410397.2025.2557074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since the release of the <i>Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization</i> Supreme Court decision in June 2022, researchers have been working to better understand the impact that the growing number of abortion restrictions is having on the provision of and access to abortion services in the United States (US). Less is known about the impact of abortion restrictions on the provision of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services more broadly, including at clinics that do not directly offer abortion. Between November 2023 and February 2024, we conducted interviews with SRH managers, clinic managers, and other administrators at publicly funded SRH clinics around the US to generate evidence on the effects of state-level abortion restrictions on the provision of abortion and related services, such as pregnancy options counselling and abortion referrals, at facilities providing contraceptive services. Through content analysis, we found that, while clinics in states with abortion restrictions have stopped providing abortions or are struggling to provide abortions amidst the variety of restrictive policies, clinics in states without these restrictions are also facing difficulties, specifically having to adjust their care provision due to the increase in patients seeking abortion. Simultaneously, the complicated web of abortion regulations has led providers in all states to experience challenges related to combating misinformation and protecting reproductive autonomy. These findings demonstrate the ways in which the ripple effects of <i>Dobbs</i> extend well beyond abortion and affect the wider network of publicly funded SRH care.</p>","PeriodicalId":37074,"journal":{"name":"Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters","volume":" ","pages":"2557074"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12462416/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26410397.2025.2557074","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Since the release of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision in June 2022, researchers have been working to better understand the impact that the growing number of abortion restrictions is having on the provision of and access to abortion services in the United States (US). Less is known about the impact of abortion restrictions on the provision of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services more broadly, including at clinics that do not directly offer abortion. Between November 2023 and February 2024, we conducted interviews with SRH managers, clinic managers, and other administrators at publicly funded SRH clinics around the US to generate evidence on the effects of state-level abortion restrictions on the provision of abortion and related services, such as pregnancy options counselling and abortion referrals, at facilities providing contraceptive services. Through content analysis, we found that, while clinics in states with abortion restrictions have stopped providing abortions or are struggling to provide abortions amidst the variety of restrictive policies, clinics in states without these restrictions are also facing difficulties, specifically having to adjust their care provision due to the increase in patients seeking abortion. Simultaneously, the complicated web of abortion regulations has led providers in all states to experience challenges related to combating misinformation and protecting reproductive autonomy. These findings demonstrate the ways in which the ripple effects of Dobbs extend well beyond abortion and affect the wider network of publicly funded SRH care.
期刊介绍:
SRHM is a multidisciplinary journal, welcoming submissions from a wide range of disciplines, including the social sciences and humanities, behavioural science, public health, human rights and law. The journal welcomes a range of methodological approaches, including qualitative and quantitative analyses such as policy analysis; mixed methods approaches to public health and health systems research; economic, political and historical analysis; and epidemiological work with a focus on SRHR. Key topics addressed in SRHM include (but are not limited to) abortion, family planning, contraception, female genital mutilation, HIV and other STIs, human papillomavirus (HPV), maternal health, SRHR in humanitarian settings, gender-based and other forms of interpersonal violence, young people, gender, sexuality, sexual rights and sexual pleasure.