Search

Abstract Background The pressing need to expand the biomedical HIV prevention evidence base during pregnancy is now increasingly recognized. Women’s views regarding participation in such trials and initiating PrEP while pregnant are critical to inform evolving policy and best practices aimed at responsibly expanding evidence-based access for this population. Methods We conducted 35 semi-structured interviews with reproductive-aged women in Malawi in the local language, Chichewa. Participants were HIV-negative and purposively sampled to capture a range of experience with research during pregnancy. Women’s perspectives on enrolling in three hypothetical HIV prevention trial vignettes while pregnant were explored, testing: (1) oral PrEP (Truvada) (2) a vaginal ring (dapivirine), and (3) a randomized trial comparing the two. The vignettes were read aloud to participants and a simple visual was provided. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, translated, and coded using NVivo 11. Thematic analysis informed the analytic approach. Results A majority of women accepted participation in all trials. Women’s views on research participation varied largely based on their assessment of whether participation or nonparticipation would best protect their own health and that of their offspring. Women interested in participating described power dynamics with their partner as fueling their HIV exposure concerns and highlighted health benefits of participation—principally, HIV protection and access to testing/treatment and ancillary care, and perceived potential risks of the vignettes as low. Women who were uninterested in participating highlighted potential maternal and fetal health risks of the trial, challenges of justifying prevention use to their partner, and raised some modality-specific concerns. Women also described ways their social networks, sense of altruism and adherence requirements would influence participation decisions. Conclusions The majority of participants conveyed strong interest in participating in biomedical HIV prevention research during pregnancy, largely motivated by a desire to protect themselves and their offspring. Our results are consistent with other studies that found high acceptance of HIV prevention products during pregnancy, and support the current direction of HIV research policies and practices that are increasingly aimed at protecting the health of pregnant women and their offspring through responsible research, rather than defaulting to their exclusion.

The scientific and ethical importance of including women of reproductive age in biomedical research is widely acknowledged. Concerns about preventing fetal exposure to research interventions have motivated requirements for contraception among reproductive aged women in biomedical studies-often irrespective of risks and benefits or a woman's actual potential for pregnancy, raising important questions about when such requirements are appropriate. The perspectives of women themselves on these issues are largely unexplored. We conducted 140 interviews, 70 in the U.S. and 70 in Malawi, with women either living with or at-risk for HIV, exploring their views about the practice of requiring contraception in clinical trials. A majority of women interviewed from both countries indicated overall support for the practice, with seven themes characterizing advantages and disadvantages raised: reproductive control, health effects, prevention of fetal harm, burden on women, deferral to authority, autonomy regarding enrollment and birth control method, and relationship concerns. While women in the US frequently raised prevention of fetal harm as a key advantage, many other positives noted by women in both countries were related to contraception use in general, not specific to a trial context. With regard to disadvantages, U.S. women tended to focus on biomedical risks such as side effects and impact on fertility, whereas Malawian women focused on the social risks of contraception requirements, including violations of trust in marital relations and suspicions of potential infidelity. Given the potential benefits and burdens highlighted, contraception in research should be sensitive to actual fetal risk assessments; directed where justified at optimizing effective pregnancy prevention; responsive to women's reproductive preferences; and made available as an ancillary benefit even where risk thresholds do not justify requirement-in order to facilitate trials that are both ethical and robustly oriented around the interests and lives of women who will participate in them.

Table of contents A1. Infant feeding and poverty: a public health perspective in a global context Lisa H. Amir A2. Mothers’ experiences with galactagogues for lactation: an exploratory cross sectional study Alessandra Bazzano, Shelley Thibeau, Katherine P. Theall A3. The motherhood journey and breastfeeding: from self-efficacy to resilience and social stigma Anna Blair, Karin Cadwell A4. Breastfeeding as an evolutionary adaptive behavior Emily A. Bronson A5. Conflict-of-interest in public health policy: as real as that logo on your website Elizabeth C. Brooks A6. Co-opting sisterhood and motherhood: behind the scenes of Similac’s aggressive social media campaigns Jodine Chase A7. The exclusion of women from the definition of exclusive breastfeeding Ellen Chetwynd, Rebecca Costello, Kathryn Wouk A8. Healthy maternity policies in the workplace: a state health department’s experience with the “Bring Your Infant to Work” program Lindsey Dermid-Gray A9. Implications for a paradigm shift: factors related to breastfeeding among African American women Stephanie Devane-Johnson, Cheryl Woods Giscombe, Miriam Labbok A10. Social experiences of breastfeeding: building bridges between research and policy: an ESRC-funded seminar series in the UK Sally Dowling A11. Manager’s perspectives of lactation breaks Melanie Fraser A12. The challenging second night: a dialogue from two perspectives Jane Grassley, Deborah McCarter-Spaulding, Becky Spencer A13. The role of lactation consultants in two council breastfeeding services in Melbourne, Australia – some preliminary impressions Jennifer Hocking, Pranee Liamputtong A14. Integrating social marketing and community engagement concepts in community breastfeeding programs Sheree H. Keitt, Harumi Reis-Reilly A15. What happens before and after the maternity stay? Creating a community-wide Ten Steps approach Miriam Labbok A16. #RVABREASTFEEDS: cultivating a breastfeeding-friendly community Leslie Lytle A17. Public health vs. free trade: a longitudinal analysis of a global policy to protect breastfeeding Mary Ann Merz A18. Legislative advocacy and grassroots organizing for improved breastfeeding laws in Virginia Kate Noon A19. Breastfeeding and the rights of incarcerated women Krista M Olson A20. Barriers and support for Puerto Rican breastfeeding working mothers Ana M. Parrilla-Rodríguez, José J. Gorrín-Peralta Melissa Pellicier, Zeleida M. Vázquez-Rivera A21. Pumping at work: a daily struggle for Puerto Rican breastfeeding mothers in spite of the law Melissa Pellicier A22. “I saw a wrong and I wanted to stand up for what I thought was right:” a narrative study on becoming a breastfeeding activist Jennifer L. Pemberton A23. Peer breastfeeding support: advocacy and action Catherine McEvilly Pestl A24. Good intentions: a study of breastfeeding intention and postpartum realities among first-time Central Brooklyn mothers Jennifer Pierre, Philip Noyes, Khushbu Srivastava, Sharon Marshall-Taylor A25. Women describing the infant feeding choice: the impact of the WIC breastfeeding classes on infant feeding practices in Ionia, Michigan Jennifer Proto, Sarah Hyland Laurie Brinks A26. Local and state programs and national partnership to reduce disparities through community breastfeeding support Harumi Reis-Reilly, Martelle Esposito, Megan Phillippi A27. Beyond black breastfeeding week: instagram image content analysis for #blackwomendobreastfeed/#bwdbf Cynthia L. Sears, Delores James, Cedric Harville, Kristina Carswell A28. Stakeholder views of breastfeeding education in the K-12 environment: a review of the literature Nicola Singletary, L. Suzanne Goodell, April Fogleman A29. “The Breastfeeding Transition”: a framework for explaining changes in global breastfeeding rates as related to large-scale forces shaping the status of women Paige Hall Smith A30. Breastfeeding, contraception, and ethics, oh my! Advocacy and informed decision-making in the post-partum period Alison M. Stuebe, Amy G. Bryant, Anne Drapkin Lyerly A31. A hard day’s night: juggling nighttime breastfeeding, sleep, and work Cecilia Tomori A32. Empowering change in Indian country through breastfeeding education Amanda L. Watkins, Joan E. Dodgson A33. Servants and “Little Mothers” take charge: work, class, and breastfeeding rates in the early 20th-century U.S. Jacqueline H. Wolf

When surgery is performed on pregnant women for the sake of the fetus (MFS or maternal fetal surgery), it is often discussed in terms of the fetus alone. This usage exemplifies what philosophers call the fallacy of abstraction: considering a concept as if it were separable from another concept whose meaning is essentially related to it. In light of their potential separability, research on pregnant women raises the possibility of conflicts between the interests of the woman and those of the fetus. Such research should meet the requirement of equipoise, i.e., a state of genuine uncertainty about the risks and benefits of alternative interventions or noninterventions. While illustrating the fallacy of abstraction in discussions of MFS, we review the rationale for explicit acknowledgment of the essential tie between fetus and pregnant woman. Next we examine whether it is possible to meet the requirement of equipoise in research on MFS, focusing on a fetal condition called myelomeningocele. We show how issues related to equipoise in nonpregnant populations appear also in debates regarding MFS. We also examine evidence in support of claims that the requirement of equipoise has been satisfied with respect to ``the fetal patient'' while considering risks and benefits to gestating women only marginally or not at all. After delineating challenges and possibilities for equipoise in MFS research, we conclude with a suggestion for avoiding the fallacy of abstraction and achieving equipoise so that research on MFS may be ethically conducted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of aggregated quality of life estimates in the formation of public policy and practice guidelines raises concerns about the moral relevance of variability in values in preferences for health care. This variability may reflect unique and deeply held beliefs that may be lost when averaged with the preferences of other individuals. Feminist moral theories which argue for attention to context and particularity underline the importance of ascertaining the extent to which differences in preferences for health states reveal information which is morally relevant to clinicians and policymakers. To facilitate these considerations, we present an empirical study of preferences for the timing and occurrence of health states associated with hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Sixteen women between the ages of 45 and 55 were enrolled in this pilot study. Their preferences regarding five health states associated with HRT (menopausal symptoms, side effects of HRT, breast cancer, myocardial infarction, and osteoporosis) were assessed in quantitative terms known as utilities. Two standard methods, the visual analog scale (VAS) and the standard gamble (SG), were used to assess utility and time preference (calculated as a discount rate). The wide variability of responses underlines the importance of tailoring health care to individual women's preferences. Policy guidelines which incorporate utility analysis must recognize the normative limitations of aggregated preferences, and the moral relevance of individual conceptions of health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increased risk of harm from COVID-19 infection in pregnancy highlights the importance of including pregnant people in COVID-19 vaccine development and deployment. Promising vaccines being developed include replication-competent platforms, which are typically contraindicated during pregnancy because of theoretical risk. However, replicating vaccines are administered in and around pregnancy, either inadvertently because of unknown pregnancy status or when recommended.The historical cases of Ebola virus, yellow fever, and rubella demonstrate that contradictory messages around the safety of live vaccines in pregnancy have critical public health costs. First, restricting study or use of replicating vaccines in pregnancy may delay or deny access to the only available protection against deadly diseases. Additionally, not vaccinating pregnant people may slow epidemic control. Finally, uncertainty and worry around the safety of live vaccines may lead to terminations of otherwise desired pregnancies after inadvertent vaccination in pregnancy.If one of the vaccines deployed to combat the current global COVID-19 pandemic is replication competent, historical cases offer important lessons for ethical and effective protection for pregnant populations.