Heather Gould

Understanding why women seek abortions in the US

BackgroundThe current political climate with regards to abortion in the US, along with the economic recession may be affecting women’s reasons for seeking abortion, warranting a new investigation into the reasons why women seek abortion.MethodsData for this study were drawn from baseline quantitative and qualitative data from the Turnaway Study, an ongoing, five-year, longitudinal study evaluating the health and socioeconomic consequences of receiving or being denied an abortion in the US. While the study has followed women for over two full years, it relies on the baseline data which were collected from 2008 through the end of 2010. The sample included 954 women from 30 abortion facilities across the US who responded to two open ended questions regarding the reasons why they wanted to terminate their pregnancy approximately one week after seeking an abortion.ResultsWomen’s reasons for seeking an abortion fell into 11 broad themes. The predominant themes identified as reasons for seeking abortion included financial reasons (40%), timing (36%), partner related reasons (31%), and the need to focus on other children (29%). Most women reported multiple reasons for seeking an abortion crossing over several themes (64%). Using mixed effects multivariate logistic regression analyses, we identified the social and demographic predictors of the predominant themes women gave for seeking an abortion.ConclusionsStudy findings demonstrate that the reasons women seek abortion are complex and interrelated, similar to those found in previous studies. While some women stated only one factor that contributed to their desire to terminate their pregnancies, others pointed to a myriad of factors that, cumulatively, resulted in their seeking abortion. As indicated by the differences we observed among women’s reasons by individual characteristics, women seek abortion for reasons related to their circumstances, including their socioeconomic status, age, health, parity and marital status. It is important that policy makers consider women’s motivations for choosing abortion, as decisions to support or oppose such legislation could have profound effects on the health, socioeconomic outcomes and life trajectories of women facing unwanted pregnancies.

Women's Emotions One Week After Receiving or Being Denied an Abortion in the United States

CONTEXT The notion that abortion causes poor mental health has gained traction, even though it is not supported by research. Few studies have comprehensively investigated womens postabortion emotions. METHODS Baseline data from a longitudinal study of women seeking abortion at 30 U.S. facilities between 2008 and 2010 were used to examine emotions among 843 women who received an abortion just prior to the facilitys gestational age limit, were denied an abortion because they presented just beyond the gestational limit or obtained a first-trimester abortion. Multivariable analyses were used to compare womens emotions about their pregnancy and about their receipt or denial of abortion after one week, and to identify variables associated with experiencing primarily negative emotions postabortion. RESULTS Compared with women who obtained a near-limit abortion, those denied the abortion felt more regret and anger (scoring, on average, 0.4-0.5 points higher on a 0-4 scale), and less relief and happiness (scoring 1.4 and 0.3 points lower, respectively). Among women who had obtained the abortion, the greater the extent to which they had planned the pregnancy or had difficulty deciding to seek abortion, the more likely they were to feel primarily negative emotions (odds ratios, 1.2 and 2.5, respectively). Most (95%) women who had obtained the abortion felt it was the right decision, as did 89% of those who expressed regret. CONCLUSIONS Difficulty with the abortion decision and the degree to which the pregnancy had been planned were most important for womens postabortion emotional state. Experiencing negative emotions postabortion is different from believing that abortion was not the right decision.

Out-of-Pocket Costs and Insurance Coverage for Abortion in the United States

BACKGROUND Since 1976, federal Medicaid has excluded abortion care except in a small number of circumstances; 17 states provide this coverage using state Medicaid dollars. Since 2010, federal and state restrictions on insurance coverage for abortion have increased. This paper describes payment for abortion care before new restrictions among a sample of women receiving first and second trimester abortions. METHODS Data are from the Turnaway Study, a study of women seeking abortion care at 30 facilities across the United States. FINDINGS Two thirds received financial assistance, with those with pregnancies at later gestations more likely to receive assistance. Seven percent received funding from private insurance, 34% state Medicaid, and 29% other organizations. Median out-of-pocket costs when private insurance or Medicaid paid were

Decision Rightness and Emotional Responses to Abortion in the United States: A Longitudinal Study.

18 and

Implementing a Prospective Study of Women Seeking Abortion in the United States: Understanding and Overcoming Barriers to Recruitment

0. Median out-of-pocket cost for women for whom insurance or Medicaid did not pay was

Risk of violence from the man involved in the pregnancy after receiving or being denied an abortion

575. For more than half, out-of-pocket costs were equivalent to more than one-third of monthly personal income; this was closer to two thirds among those receiving later abortions. One quarter who had private insurance had their abortion covered through insurance. Among women possibly eligible for Medicaid based on income and residence, more than one third received Medicaid coverage for the abortion. More than half reported cost as a reason for delay in obtaining an abortion. In a multivariate analysis, living in a state where Medicaid for abortion was available, having Medicaid or private insurance, being at a lower gestational age, and higher income were associated with lower odds of reporting cost as a reason for delay. CONCLUSIONS Out-of-pocket costs for abortion care are substantial for many women, especially at later gestations. There are significant gaps in public and private insurance coverage for abortion.

Projections and opinions from 100 experts in long-acting reversible contraception

Background Arguments that abortion causes women emotional harm are used to regulate abortion, particularly later procedures, in the United States. However, existing research is inconclusive. We examined women’s emotions and reports of whether the abortion decision was the right one for them over the three years after having an induced abortion. Methods We recruited a cohort of women seeking abortions between 2008-2010 at 30 facilities across the United States, selected based on having the latest gestational age limit within 150 miles. Two groups of women (n=667) were followed prospectively for three years: women having first-trimester procedures and women terminating pregnancies within two weeks under facilities’ gestational age limits at the same facilities. Participants completed semiannual phone surveys to assess whether they felt that having the abortion was the right decision for them; negative emotions (regret, anger, guilt, sadness) about the abortion; and positive emotions (relief, happiness). Multivariable mixed-effects models were used to examine changes in each outcome over time, to compare the two groups, and to identify associated factors. Results The predicted probability of reporting that abortion was the right decision was over 99% at all time points over three years. Women with more planned pregnancies and who had more difficulty deciding to terminate the pregnancy had lower odds of reporting the abortion was the right decision (aOR=0.71 [0.60, 0.85] and 0.46 [0.36, 0.64], respectively). Both negative and positive emotions declined over time, with no differences between women having procedures near gestational age limits versus first-trimester abortions. Higher perceived community abortion stigma and lower social support were associated with more negative emotions (b=0.45 [0.31, 0.58] and b=-0.61 [-0.93, -0.29], respectively). Conclusions Women experienced decreasing emotional intensity over time, and the overwhelming majority of women felt that termination was the right decision for them over three years. Emotional support may be beneficial for women having abortions who report intended pregnancies or difficulty deciding.

How women anticipate coping after an abortion

BACKGROUND The Turnaway Study is designed to prospectively study the outcomes of women who sought-but did not all obtain-abortions. This design permits more accurate inferences about the health consequences of abortion for women, but requires the recruitment of a large number of women from remote health care facilities to a study a sensitive topic. This paper explores the Turnaway Studys recruitment process. METHODS From 2008 to 2010, the staff at 30 abortion-providing facilities recruited eligible female patients. Eight interventions were evaluated using multilevel logistic regression for their impact on eligible patients being approached, approached patients agreeing to go through informed consent by phone, and enrolled patients completing the baseline interview. FINDINGS After site visits, patients had roughly twice the odds of being approached by facility staff and twice the odds of then agreeing to go through informed consent. When all recruitment steps were considered together, the net effect of site visits was to increase the odds that eligible patients participated by nearly a factor of six. After the introduction of a patient gift card incentive, patients had over three times the odds of agreeing to go through informed consent. With each passing month, however, staff demonstrated a 9% reduced odds of approaching eligible patients about the study. CONCLUSION Prioritizing scientific rigor over the convenience of using existing datasets, the Turnaway Study confronted recruitment challenges common to medical practice-based studies and unique to sensitive services. Visiting sites and communicating frequently with facility staff, as well as offering incentives to patients to hear more about the study before informed consent, may help to increase participation in prospective health studies and facilitate evaluation of sensitive womens health services.

Predictors of Abortion Counseling Receipt and Helpfulness in the United States

BackgroundIntimate partner violence is common among women having abortions, with between 6% and 22% reporting recent violence from an intimate partner. Concern about violence is a reason some pregnant women decide to terminate their pregnancies. Whether risk of violence decreases after having an abortion, remains unknown.MethodsData are from the Turnaway Study, a prospective cohort study of women seeking abortions at 30 facilities across the U.S. Participants included women who: presented just prior to a facility’s gestational age limit and received abortions (Near Limit Abortion Group, n = 452), presented just beyond the gestational limit and were denied abortions (Turnaways, n = 231), and received first trimester abortions (First Trimester Abortion Group, n = 273). Mixed effects logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between receiving versus being denied abortion and subsequent violence from the man involved in the pregnancy over 2.5 years.ResultsPhysical violence decreased for Near Limits (adjusted odds ratios (aOR), 0.93 per month; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.90, 0.96), but not Turnaways who gave birth (P < .05 versus Near Limits). The decrease for First Trimesters was similar to Near Limits (P = .324). Psychological violence decreased for all groups (aOR, 0.97; CI 0.94, 1.00), with no differential change across groups.ConclusionsPolicies restricting abortion provision may result in more women being unable to terminate unwanted pregnancies, potentially keeping them in contact with violent partners, and putting women and their children at risk.

Implications of Georgia’s 20-Week Abortion Ban

OBJECTIVE This survey of published researchers of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) examines their opinions about important barriers to LARC use in the United States (US), projections for LARC use in the absence of barriers and attitudes toward incentives for clinicians to provide and women to use LARC methods. STUDY DESIGN We identified 182 authors of 59 peer-reviewed papers on LARC use published since 2013. A total of 104 completed an internet survey. We used descriptive and multivariate analyses to assess LARC use barriers and respondent characteristics associated with LARC projections and opinions. RESULTS The most commonly identified barrier was the cost of the device (63%), followed by womens knowledge of safety, method acceptability and expectations about use. A shortage of trained providers was a commonly cited barrier, primarily of primary care providers (49%). Median and modal projections of LARC use in the absence of these barriers were 25-29% of contracepting women. There was limited support for provider incentives and almost no support for incentives for women to use LARC methods, primarily out of concern about coercion. CONCLUSIONS Clinical and social science LARC experts project at least a doubling of the current US rate of LARC use if barriers to method provision and adoption are removed. While LARC experts recognize the promise of LARC methods to better meet womens contraceptive needs, they anticipate that the majority of US women will not choose LARC methods. Reducing unintended pregnancy rates will depend on knowledge, availability and use of a wider range of methods of contraception to meet womens individual needs. IMPLICATIONS Efforts to increase LARC use need to meet the dual goals of increasing access to LARC methods and protecting womens reproductive autonomy. To accomplish this, we need reasonable expectations for use, provider training, low-cost devices and noncoercive counseling, rather than incentives for provision or use.