Sarah C. M. Roberts

Complex calculations: how drug use during pregnancy becomes a barrier to prenatal care.

Pregnant women who use drugs are more likely to receive little or no prenatal care. This study sought to understand how drug use and factors associated with drug use influence women’s prenatal care use. A total of 20 semi-structured interviews and 2 focus groups were conducted with a racially/ethnically diverse sample of low-income women using alcohol and drugs in a California county. Women using drugs attend and avoid prenatal care for reasons not connected to their drug use: concern for the health of their baby, social support, and extrinsic barriers such as health insurance and transportation. Drug use itself is a barrier for a few women. In addition to drug use, women experience multiple simultaneous risk factors. Both the drug use and the multiple simultaneous risk factors make resolving extrinsic barriers more difficult. Women also fear the effects of drug use on their baby’s health and fear being reported to Child Protective Services, each of which influence women’s prenatal care use. Increasing the number of pregnant women who use drugs who receive prenatal care requires systems-level rather than only individual-level changes. These changes require a paradigm shift to viewing drug use in context of the person and society and acceptance of responsibility for unintended consequences of public health bureaucratic procedures and messages about effects of drug use during pregnancy.

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

Gender differences in public and private drinking contexts: a multi-level GENACIS analysis.

18 and

A comparison of depression and anxiety symptom trajectories between women who had an abortion and women denied one

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

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

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.

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

This multi-national study hypothesized that higher levels of country-level gender equality would predict smaller differences in the frequency of women’s compared to men’s drinking in public (like bars and restaurants) settings and possibly private (home or party) settings. GENACIS project survey data with drinking contexts included 22 countries in Europe (8); the Americas (7); Asia (3); Australasia (2), and Africa (2), analyzed using hierarchical linear models (individuals nested within country). Age, gender and marital status were individual predictors; country-level gender equality as well as equality in economic participation, education, and political participation, and reproductive autonomy and context of violence against women measures were country-level variables. In separate models, more reproductive autonomy, economic participation, and educational attainment and less violence against women predicted smaller differences in drinking in public settings. Once controlling for country-level economic status, only equality in economic participation predicted the size of the gender difference. Most country-level variables did not explain the gender difference in frequency of drinking in private settings. Where gender equality predicted this difference, the direction of the findings was opposite from the direction in public settings, with more equality predicting a larger gender difference, although this relationship was no longer significant after controlling for country-level economic status. Findings suggest that country-level gender equality may influence gender differences in drinking. However, the effects of gender equality on drinking may depend on the specific alcohol measure, in this case drinking context, as well as on the aspect of gender equality considered. Similar studies that use only global measures of gender equality may miss key relationships. We consider potential implications for alcohol related consequences, policy and public health.

Volume and Type of Alcohol During Early Pregnancy and the Risk of Miscarriage

BACKGROUND This study prospectively assesses the mental health outcomes among women seeking abortions, by comparing women having later abortions with women denied abortions, up to 2 years post-abortion seeking. METHOD We present the first 2 years of a 5-year telephone interview study that is following 956 women who sought an abortion from 30 facilities throughout the USA. We use adjusted linear mixed-effects regression analyses to assess whether symptoms of depression and anxiety, as measured by the Brief Symptom Inventory-short form and the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders Patient Health Questionnaire, differ over time among women denied an abortion due to advanced gestational age, compared with women who received abortions. RESULTS Baseline predicted mean depressive symptom scores for women denied abortion (3.07) were similar to women receiving an abortion just below the gestational limit (2.86). Depressive symptoms declined over time, with no difference between groups. Initial predicted mean anxiety symptoms were higher among women denied care (2.59) than among women who had an abortion just below the gestational limit (1.91). Anxiety levels in the two groups declined and converged after 1 year. CONCLUSIONS Women who received an abortion had similar or lower levels of depression and anxiety than women denied an abortion. Our findings do not support the notion that abortion is a cause of mental health problems.

Universal Screening for Alcohol and Drug Use and Racial Disparities in Child Protective Services Reporting

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.

Alcohol, Tobacco and Drug Use as Reasons for Abortion

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.

Utah's 72-Hour Waiting Period for Abortion: Experiences Among a Clinic-Based Sample of Women.

Background: Research on alcohol consumption during pregnancy and miscarriage spans over three decades, yet the relationship is still not well-understood. Objectives: To assess the relationship between volume and type of alcohol consumed during pregnancy in relation to miscarriage. Methods: We utilized data from a population-based cohort study of pregnant women (n = 1061) of which 172 (16%) women had a miscarriage. Upon study entry, participants were asked about their alcohol consumption during pregnancy. Based on the average number of drinks per week, women were categorized into one of three categories: four or more drinks per week (n = 32, 3%), less than four drinks per week (n = 403, 38%), and no alcohol intake (n = 626, 59%). In addition, women were categorized by the type of alcohol beverage they consumed: beer only (n = 47, 4%), spirits only (n = 56, 5%), wine only (n = 160, 15%), or a combination of two or more types of alcohol (n = 172, 16%). Results: A significant increased risk of miscarriage (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 2.65; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.38, 5.10) was found for women who drank four or more drinks a week. Our findings also suggest the relationship between alcohol intake during pregnancy and miscarriage is strongest for miscarriage occurring prior to 10 weeks of gestation. In addition, women who drank only spirits had more than a two-fold increased risk of miscarriage compared to women who abstained (aHR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.32, 3.81). Conclusions/Importance: Future research assessing the factors that may contribute to an increased risk of miscarriage should consider the type of alcohol consumed.