Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health最新文献

{"title":"Factors Influencing Contraceptive Use Among Women With Serious Mental Illness Residing in Pennsylvania.","authors":"Cara Nikolajski, Kelly Williams, Mary Hawk, Jessica G Burke","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70067","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70067","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Women living with a serious mental illness (SMI) can experience a myriad of challenges throughout their reproductive years including suboptimal contraceptive use and unintended pregnancy. Little is known about the contextual factors that influence the contraceptive use of women with SMI. To address this gap, we conducted qualitative interviews with women with SMI residing in Pennsylvania, to understand their pregnancy intentions, current contraceptive use, and factors that influence their contraceptive use behaviors and experiences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted twenty-eight semi-structured in-depth interviews with a convenience sample of women who were sexually active and between the ages of 18-45 with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder (n = 10), MDD (n = 12), and schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder (n = 6). Two coders analyzed transcripts using Crabtree and Miller's editing approach to identify qualitative themes and subthemes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most women (89%) reported wanting to avoid pregnancy; however, their contraceptive use did not always align with these intentions. SMI symptoms, contraceptive knowledge and attitudes, substance use, reproductive coercion, intimate partner violence, and sexual assault/abuse influenced participants' contraceptive use. Among this sample, a larger proportion of women with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder experienced reproductive coercion compared to women with MDD or bipolar disorder.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Study findings underscore the critical need for contraceptive counseling that considers the complex and potentially unique challenges faced by women with SMI. Future research should focus on developing and evaluating integrated care models that effectively support their family planning and contraceptive needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"194-204"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13247852/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148139358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"\"It's My Dark Secret\": A Qualitative Study on the Abortion Experiences of US Active-Duty Servicewomen.","authors":"Caitlin Russell, Tiara Walz, Laura Manzo, Shelby Mueller, Sharon Messina, Sharon Arana, Keira Feng, Holly Harner","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70064","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70064","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Hyde Amendment limits US military abortion care and coverage for active-duty servicewomen (ADSW). ADSW face numerous barriers to care when seeking an abortion. The purpose of this study was to explore the lived experiences of US servicewomen who had an abortion while serving on active duty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Researchers conducted a qualitative secondary analysis of free-text response data using thematic analysis. We developed the codebook using a modified version of Coast et al.'s (2018) framework for Trajectories of women's abortion related care. Data were collected between December 2021 to June 2022 and included N = 178 participants who self-reported having an abortion while serving on active duty in the US military.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most participants (n = 122, 62%) cited unplanned pregnancy as their reason for having an abortion. Some participants (n = 22, 12%), identified as having a \"medically necessary\" abortion (i.e., miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy). Emergent themes included lack of understanding about abortion care, financial and logistical barriers to accessing abortion care often exacerbated by military policies, lack of medical privacy, and subpar care received from military treatment facilities during pregnancy options counseling or TRICARE covered abortion care.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>ADSW experience systemic barriers to care and often seek care outside of the military medical system to protect their privacy. Military healthcare professionals do not provide adequate pregnancy options counseling or patient education regarding pregnancy loss. The US Department of Defense should enact policies ensuring access to abortion care to maintain the physical well-being and mission readiness of servicewomen.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"159-169"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13247853/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147785143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Relationship Between United States Medical Students' Opinions About Abortion Bans and Considerations for Training and Practice in Kentucky.","authors":"Melissa Eggen, Caitlin Reichard, Shriya Dodwani, Chandrima Chatterjee, Urooj Nasim","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70060","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70060","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We sought to understand the relationship between Kentucky medical students' personal beliefs and values about the state's restrictive abortion climate and their considerations for residency training and/or post-residency practice in Kentucky.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed medical school students enrolled in two medical schools in Kentucky about their personal beliefs and values regarding the state's abortion climate and whether they were considering residency training and/or staying post-residency in Kentucky. We used descriptive statistics to examine differences in responses, stratified by consideration for residency training and staying. We further examined these relationships among the subset of students who were considering a residency in obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey response rate was 17.9%. Overall, 77.8% (n = 210) of respondents indicated that the current anti-abortion climate in Kentucky did not align with their personal beliefs and values. Among all medical students, 51.1% (n = 138) indicated they were considering staying in Kentucky post-residency, including 29% of those considering an OBGYN residency. Among those considering an OBGYN residency (n = 74), 51.4% (n = 38) reported that they were considering staying in Kentucky for residency, compared with 48.6% (n = 69) of those who were not considering an OBGYN residency.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While most responding medical students reported their personal beliefs and values do not align with the state's anti-abortion climate, the majority are considering staying in Kentucky for residency and post-residency practice, regardless of their interest in an OBGYN residency. This suggests that opinions about the anti-abortion climate may not factor prominently in students' decisions about residency training and practice location.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"135-141"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147491941","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Toward a Crisis Pregnancy Center Client Typology: Abortion-Seekers' Expectations and Experiences Following Implementation of Texas' Early Abortion Ban.","authors":"Anna Chatillon, Whitney Arey, Klaira Lerma, Gema Alemán, Juliette Draper, Anitra Beasley, Kari White","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70065","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70065","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study explores pregnant Texans' expectations of and experiences with crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) following implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB8), which in September 2021 prohibited abortions in Texas after detection of embryonic cardiac activity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed in-depth interviews with English-speaking Texans over 18 years of age who were or had recently been seeking abortion, focused on their care-seeking experiences, including with CPCs. Between October 2021 and August 2022, we recruited participants via online ads in Texas and flyers in abortion-providing facilities in seven other states. Using thematic analysis, we identified themes in CPC experiences and developed a CPC client typology.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 120 participants, 36 described contact with CPCs; we categorize them into three client types, based on awareness of CPCs' anti-abortion position and expectations of CPC services. Fifteen were \"deceived clients\": unaware of CPCs' position, they contacted a CPC expecting abortion care or all-options counseling. Most remaining participants (n = 11) were \"pragmatic clients\": also unaware of CPCs' anti-abortion position, they expected only pregnancy information or support. A minority (n = 8) were \"strategic clients\"-aware of CPCs' anti-abortion position and therefore expecting only pregnancy information, they used CPC services strategically to determine eligibility for in-state abortion care or medication abortion.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In addition to contacting CPCs because they were deceived or pragmatic, pregnant Texans considering abortion after SB8 drew on CPC services strategically. In an abortion-restrictive setting, pregnant people may try to use CPCs for free services that they cannot get as easily from licensed medical providers.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"142-150"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147844447","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Knowledge of Legality of Abortion and Other Reproductive Health Practices Among Women in Ohio Post-Dobbs.","authors":"Maria F Gallo, Abigail Underwood, Mikaela H Smith, Evangeline Warren, Robert B Hood, Abigail Norris Turner","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70062","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70062","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Misconceptions about the legality of reproductive healthcare could prevent or delay people from accessing needed services. We evaluated knowledge about the legality of abortion and 11 other reproductive health practices in Ohio.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed data from a population-representative survey of adult, reproductive-age women in Ohio (September 2022-August 2023; N = 2421) collected after the US Supreme Court's June 2022 Dobbs decision allowing states to restrict abortion. We used log binomial regression to identify participant factors related to lacking knowledge of legality and compared knowledge in 2022-2023 to a pre-Dobbs wave (October 2018-June 2019; N = 2516) to evaluate whether misconceptions increased over time. Abortion was legal in Ohio until 22 weeks of gestation during both survey periods; however, during a brief (< 3 months) intervening period, legal abortion was restricted after approximately 6 weeks.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Post-Dobbs, substantial percentages reported believing that abortion was illegal (40.5%) or not knowing (28.7%). Many did not know the legality of other practices such as using assisted reproductive technology (17.3%), traveling out of state to obtain an abortion (44.3%), or obtaining medical care during or after miscarriage (21.3%) or for ectopic pregnancy (27.7%). The prevalence of believing that abortion was illegal was higher post-Dobbs (40.5%) compared to pre-Dobbs (10.1%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Overall, 69.2% of adult, reproductive-age women in Ohio in 2022-2023 did not know that abortion was legal in the state. Even in a state with legally protected abortion rights, women might be unaware of their legal right to healthcare, which could introduce delays in seeking or foregoing care.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"170-178"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147785338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Pathways and Roadblocks: Navigating Family-Building for Sexual and Gender Minority People Assigned Male at Birth.","authors":"Diana M Tordoff, Victoria Bruno, Jose Aguilar, Nick Liem Panyanouvong, David J Kinitz, Ava Snow, Daniel Moretti, Cassie Armea-Warren, J T Williams, Micah E Lubensky, Annesa Flentje, Mitchell R Lunn, Stephanie A Leonard, Juno Obedin-Maliver","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70063","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70063","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals assigned male at birth (AMAB) remain underrepresented in family-building research despite facing unique barriers to having children, especially when they are single or in partnerships where neither person can carry a pregnancy. This qualitative study examined the family-building experiences of cisgender sexual minority men, transgender women, and nonbinary people AMAB.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted 10 asynchronous online focus groups with 56 participants (23 parents, 33 prospective parents) across three gender groups (22 cisgender sexual minority men, 18 nonbinary people AMAB, 16 transgender women) at different phases of their family-building journey. Participants answered a series of writing prompts related to parenthood, family-building, and raising children. Data were analyzed using template analysis to identify cross-cutting and group-specific themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants had used or were considering a diversity of methods to have children, including sexual activity, medically assisted reproduction, surrogacy, adoption, and fostering. Participants' preferences for and the accessibility of each of these methods were influenced by intersecting issues of identity, systemic inequities, and cultural belonging. Financial constraints were pervasive, as were concerns related to legal parentage and discrimination. Race and ethnicity profoundly shaped participants' decisions, including preferences for race-concordant gamete donors and experiences of discrimination within fertility and adoption settings.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings reflect the diversity of family-building goals and priorities within SGM communities and underscore the importance of inclusive reproductive health services. This comparative examination of family-building among cisgender men, transgender women, and nonbinary individuals AMAB revealed both shared and unique barriers to parenthood.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"179-193"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147785409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Medical Student Perspectives on Abortion Education in US Osteopathic Medical School Curricula.","authors":"Rachel Steffes, Priya Thakur, Stephanie Cox, Charles Adams, Bradley A Creamer, Jennifer F Dennis","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70049","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70049","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Current understanding of reproductive health content in medical school curricula is limited. This study explores abortion education offerings of osteopathic medical students (OMS) in the United States (US). After successfully completing their training, OMS receive a doctorate in osteopathic medicine (DO) rather than a Doctor of Medicine (MD). An increasing number of students are receiving DO medical education.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed and distributed a 19-item survey to OMS through social media and research offices at all US osteopathic medical schools. We used descriptive statistics and logistic regression models to analyze the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our survey resulted in 256 responses from 37 institutions (43% preclinical, n = 108; 57% clinical, n = 143). Approximately 72.1% of respondents (n = 137) were attending medical school in a state with limitations on abortion access. Over half (52.4%, n = 108) of respondents indicated their school was delivering abortion and/or contraception curriculum, with fewer schools having optional training (20%, n = 42) or no educational offerings (27%, n = 56). Of schools offering abortion education, the most frequent content included \"both abortion and contraception education\" (79.2%, n = 80); fewer reported \"contraception education only\" (17.8%, n = 18) or \"abortion education only\" (3%, n = 3) content. Half of respondents with optional abortion education participated, while 40.5% (n = 17) opted out. The most frequently reported time dedicated to abortion education was < 59 min (39.9%, n = 75). Clinical students were significantly more satisfied (p = 0.0458) with the time allotted to abortion content and perceived ability (p = 0.0256) to provide patient education on abortion.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Clinical students reported significantly increased satisfaction with abortion education received during their training as compared to preclinical students. Despite the majority supporting abortion education, most OMS received less than 1 h of dedicated instruction highlighting expansion opportunities.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"49-57"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145764288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Changes in Statutory Rape Laws Across the United States From 2000 to 2021: A Publicly Available, Longitudinal Database.","authors":"Kaya Van Roost, Miranda Horn, Megan Butler, Alissa Koski","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70055","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70055","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Statutory rape laws establish the age of consent to sex and related exceptions. To date, scholars have rarely examined statutory rape laws in the United States (US), in part because no comprehensive database of the laws exists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We created a longitudinal database of statutory rape laws in each of the 50 US states and Washington, DC between 2000 and 2021. We coded laws according to age of consent to sex, close-in-age exceptions, and marital exemptions and examined how they have changed in the first two decades of the 21st century.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 2021, the age of consent varied between 16 (n = 32), 17 (n = 7), and 18 (n = 12) across states. Most states had exceptions to the age of consent for persons close-in-age (n = 39) and married couples (n = 39). From 2000 to 2021, one state increased its age of consent, two states removed close-in-age exceptions and four added them, six states removed marital exemptions, while two instated them.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Statutory rape definitions and exceptions varied widely between states, but within states, the laws rarely changed in the past two decades. The variability of laws across states raises questions about how statutory rape laws should be structured. Our longitudinal database will facilitate research which may provide a stronger empirical basis for future policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"108-119"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145991324","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Avoidance or Pursuit of Crisis Pregnancy Center Resources Among Abortion-Seeking Clients in Mississippi.","authors":"Kimberly Kelly","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70059","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70059","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Previous studies of crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) in the United States focused on clients who sought out CPCs for parenting resources. In contrast, this study focuses on the experiences of those who had already decided on abortion and describes how they avoided or selectively engaged with CPCs prior to obtaining abortion care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>I draw upon interviews with 16 abortion patients in Mississippi from June 2021 to March 2022. I recruited participants from social media and through Mississippi's lone abortion clinic. The semi-structured interviews focused on participants who were aware of CPCs' antiabortion mission at the time of the interview and why they avoided or engaged with these centers prior to their abortions. I analyzed transcripts for themes related to participants' experiences with CPCs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants described different strategies for interacting with CPCs, including deliberate avoidance based on prior knowledge of CPCs' antiabortion stance and strategic engagement to access ultrasounds or emotional support. Some participants interpreted stigmatizing practices as care, while others reported misinformation, deception, and attempted stigmatization that they explicitly resisted.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While CPCs remain a challenge to reproductive autonomy, many clients, including abortion patients, successfully bypassed or managed their CPC experiences in ways they found beneficial while circumventing CPCs' goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"39-48"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146120841","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How Are Healthcare Providers Conscientiously Objecting to Abortion in Australia? A Qualitative Study.","authors":"Bronwen Merner, Casey M Haining, Lindy Willmott, Julian Savulescu, Louise A Keogh","doi":"10.1111/psrh.70058","DOIUrl":"10.1111/psrh.70058","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Researchers have done limited empirical work to explore how healthcare providers are claiming conscientious objection to abortion care in Australia. Without this research, we cannot assess if existing mechanisms to regulate conscientious objection meet the needs of abortion seekers, abortion providers, and healthcare providers who conscientiously object to abortion care.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>We conducted semi-structured interviews with 41 interest-holders (including healthcare providers who provided or conscientiously objected to abortion care) across Australia about conscientious objection to abortion care and its regulation. We analyzed the data using framework analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified four themes describing how healthcare providers were claiming conscientious objection to abortion care. First, claims existed on a spectrum from \"partial provision\" to \"refusal without referral.\" When healthcare providers refused to provide an abortion, they did not always refer the abortion seeker to a willing provider or service. Second, claims of conscientious objection could change over time. Third, the relationship between religion and conscientious objection was not necessarily direct. Finally, some healthcare providers refused to provide abortion for reasons other than conscience.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings demonstrated that conscientious objection provisions provided a flexible mechanism for healthcare providers to opt-out of providing abortion care at different times, in different contexts, and for different reasons (including reasons other than conscience). Education and guidelines may improve healthcare providers' understandings and interpretations of conscientious objection provisions. Destigmatizing interventions may also reduce the number of healthcare providers who refuse to participate in abortion care for conscience-based and non-conscience-based reasons.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":" ","pages":"58-68"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12976807/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146167329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}