Search

Concerns about potential fetal harm caused by alcohol and drug use have motivated policymakers and public health agencies to dedicate increasing attention and resources to limiting substance use in the context of pregnancy over the past 50 years. Most states now have at least one pregnancy-specific alcohol and drug policy in place. Public health agencies have issued warnings and recommended abstinence before, during, and after pregnancy. Clinical counseling interventions for patients who use alcohol and drugs typically focus exclusively on contraception and the prevention of pregnancy without attention to nuanced pregnancy preferences and reproductive autonomy. This dissertation explores causal inference and multi-level modeling approaches to assess the intended and unintended effects of policies focused on alcohol and drug use in the context of pregnancy, taking into consideration both fetal health and reproductive autonomy. Additionally, it applies a reproductive autonomy framework to questions related to substance use and pregnancy, pushing back against traditional public health frameworks, which are focused on preventing “unintended” pregnancy and neglect to account for individual pregnancy preferences.Chapter 1 assesses whether the oldest and most common type of pregnancy-specific alcohol and drug use policy is associated with changes in birth outcomes. Specifically, we investigated the impacts of Arizona’s alcohol-only and alcohol-plus-drug child abuse and neglect policies on birth outcomes. We used state- level policy information and vital statistics data from 1.5 million singleton births conceived between January 2000 and December 2012 in Arizona and New Mexico and conducted quasi-experimental difference-in-difference approaches to compare pre-to-post policy changes in gestational length and birthweight between the states. Stratified subgroup analyses examined policy associations by race and ethnicity. Contrary to hypotheses, we found apparent population-lev

BACKGROUND: This qualitative study aims to assess perspectives of clinicians and clinic staff on mail-order pharmacy dispensing for medication abortion. METHODS: Participants included clinicians and staff involved in implementing a mail-order dispensing model for medication abortion at eleven clinics in seven states as part of a prospective cohort study, which began in January 2020 (before the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone). From June 2021 to July 2022, we invited participants at the participating clinics, including six primary care and five abortion clinics, to complete a semi-structured video interview about their experiences. We then conducted qualitative thematic analysis of interview data, summarizing themes related to perceived benefits and concerns about the mail-order model, perceived patient interest, and potential barriers to larger-scale implementation. RESULTS: We conducted 24 interviews in total with clinicians (13 physicians and one nurse practitioner) and clinic staff (n = 10). Participants highlighted perceived benefits of the mail-order model, including its potential to expand abortion services into primary care, increase patient autonomy and privacy, and to normalize abortion services. They also highlighted key logistical, clinical, and feasibility concerns about the mail-order model, and specific challenges related to integrating abortion into primary care. CONCLUSION: Clinicians and clinic staff working in primary care and abortion clinics were optimistic that mail-order dispensing of medication abortion can improve the ability of some providers to provide abortion and enable more patients to access services. The feasibility of mail-order pharmacy dispensing of medication abortion following the Supreme Court Dobbs decision is to be determined. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: Clinicaltrials.gov. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03913104. Date of registration: first submitted on April 3, 2019 and first posted on April

BackgroundThis qualitative study aims to assess perspectives of clinicians and clinic staff on mail-order pharmacy dispensing for medication abortion.MethodsParticipants included clinicians and staff involved in implementing a mail-order dispensing model for medication abortion at eleven clinics in seven states as part of a prospective cohort study, which began in January 2020 (before the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone). From June 2021 to July 2022, we invited participants at the participating clinics, including six primary care and five abortion clinics, to complete a semi-structured video interview about their experiences. We then conducted qualitative thematic analysis of interview data, summarizing themes related to perceived benefits and concerns about the mail-order model, perceived patient interest, and potential barriers to larger-scale implementation.ResultsWe conducted 24 interviews in total with clinicians (13 physicians and one nurse practitioner) and clinic staff (n = 10). Participants highlighted perceived benefits of the mail-order model, including its potential to expand abortion services into primary care, increase patient autonomy and privacy, and to normalize abortion services. They also highlighted key logistical, clinical, and feasibility concerns about the mail-order model, and specific challenges related to integrating abortion into primary care.ConclusionClinicians and clinic staff working in primary care and abortion clinics were optimistic that mail-order dispensing of medication abortion can improve the ability of some providers to provide abortion and enable more patients to access services. The feasibility of mail-order pharmacy dispensing of medication abortion following the Supreme Court Dobbs decision is to be determined.Trial registrationRegistry: Clinicaltrials.gov.Trial registration numberNCT03913104. Date of registration: first submitted on April 3, 2019 and first posted on April 12, 2019.

ImportanceBefore 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration required mifepristone to be dispensed in person, limiting access to medication abortion.ObjectiveTo estimate the effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of dispensing mifepristone for medication abortion using a mail-order pharmacy.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective cohort study was conducted from January 2020 to May 2022 and included 11 clinics in 7 states (5 abortion clinics and 6 primary care sites, 4 of which were new to abortion provision). Eligible participants were seeking medication abortion at 63 or fewer days' gestation, spoke English or Spanish, were age 15 years or older, and were willing to take misoprostol buccally. After assessing eligibility for medication abortion through an in-person screening, mifepristone and misoprostol were prescribed using a mail-order pharmacy. Patients had standard follow-up care with the clinic. Clinical information was collected from medical records. Consenting participants completed online surveys about their experiences 3 and 14 days after enrolling. A total of 540 participants were enrolled; 10 withdrew or did not take medication. Data were analyzed from August 2022 to December 2023.InterventionMifepristone, 200 mg, and misoprostol, 800 µg, prescribed to a mail-order pharmacy and mailed to participants instead of dispensed in person.Main outcomes and measuresProportion of patients with a complete abortion with medications only, reporting satisfaction with the medication abortion, and reporting timely delivery of medications.ResultsClinical outcome information was obtained and analyzed for 510 abortions (96.2%) among 506 participants (median [IQR] age, 27 [23-31] years; 506 [100%] female; 194 [38.3%] Black, 88 [17.4%] Hispanic, 141 [27.9%] White, and 45 [8.9%] multiracial/other individuals). Of these, 436 participants (85.5%; 95% CI, 82.2%-88.4%) received medications within 3 days. Complete abortion occurred after medication use in 499 cases

As U.S. states legalize recreational cannabis, some enact policies requiring Mandatory Warning Signs for cannabis during pregnancy (MWS-cannabis). While previous research has found MWS for alcohol during pregnancy (MWS-alcohol) associated with increases in adverse birth outcomes, research has not examined effects of MWS-cannabis. This study uses Vital Statistics birth certificate data from June 2015 - June 2017 in seven western states and policy data from NIAAAs Alcohol Policy Information System and takes advantage of the quasi-experiment created by Washington States enactment of MWS-cannabis in June 2016, while nearby states did not. Outcomes are birthweight, low birthweight, gestation, and preterm birth. Analyses use a Difference-in-Difference approach and compare changes in outcomes in Washington to nearby states in the process of legalizing recreational cannabis (Alaska, California, Nevada) and, as a secondary analysis, nearby states continuing to criminalize recreational cannabis (Idaho, Montana, Wyoming). Birthweight was -7.03 g lower (95% CI -10.06, -4.00) and low birthweight 0.3% higher (95% CI 0.0, 0.6) when pregnant people were exposed to MWS-cannabis than when pregnant people were not exposed to MWS-cannabis, both statistically significant (p = 0.005 and p = 0.041). Patterns for gestation, -0.014 weeks earlier (95% CI -0.038, 0.010) and preterm birth 0.2% higher (95% CI -0.2, 0.7), were similar, although not statistically significant (p = 0.168 and 0.202). The direction of findings was similar in secondary analyses, although statistical significance varied. Similar to MWS-alcohol, enacting MWS-cannabis is associated with an increase in adverse birth outcomes. The idea that MWS-cannabis provide a public health benefit is not evidence-based.

IntroductionIn Nepal, abortion is legal on request through 12 weeks of pregnancy and up to 28 weeks for health and other reasons. Abortion is available at public facilities at no cost and by trained private providers. Yet, over half of abortions are provided outside this legal system. We sought to investigate the extent to which patients are denied an abortion at clinics legally able to provide services and factors associated with presenting late for care, being denied, and receiving an abortion after being denied.MethodsWe used data from a prospective longitudinal study with 1835 women aged 15-45. Between April 2019 and December 2020, we recruited 1,835 women seeking abortions at 22 sites across Nepal, including those seeking care at any gestational age (n = 537) and then only those seeking care at or after 10 weeks of gestation or do not know their gestational age (n = 1,298). We conducted interviewer-led surveys with these women at the time they were seeking abortion service (n = 1,835), at six weeks after abortion-seeking (n = 1523) and six-month intervals for three years. Using descriptive and multivariable logistic regression models, we examined factors associated with presenting for abortion before versus after 10 weeks gestation, with receiving versus being denied an abortion, and with continuing the pregnancy after being denied care. We also described reasons for the denial of care and how and where participants sought abortion care subsequent to being denied. Mixed-effects models was used to accounting clustering effect at the facility level.ResultsAmong those recruited when eligibility included seeking abortion at any gestational age, four in ten women sought abortion care beyond 10 weeks or did not know their gestation and just over one in ten was denied care. Of the full sample, 73% were at or beyond 10 weeks gestation, 44% were denied care, and 60% of those denied continued to seek care after denial. Nearly three-quarters of those denied care were lega

This paper examines factors associated with intimate partner violence (IPV) among newly married women in Nepal, and how IPV was affected by food insecurity and COVID-19. Given evidence that food insecurity is associated with IPV and COVID-19, we explored whether increased food insecurity during COVID-19 is associated with changes in IPV. We used data from a cohort study of 200 newly married women aged 18-25 years, interviewed five times over two years at 6-month intervals (02/2018-07/2020), including after COVID-19-associated lockdowns. Bivariate analysis and mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to examine the association between selected risk factors and recent IPV. IPV increased from 24.5% at baseline to 49.2% before COVID-19 and to 80.4% after COVID-19. After adjusting for covariates, we find that both COVID-19 (OR = 2.93, 95% CI 1.07-8.02) and food insecurity (OR = 7.12, 95% CI 4.04-12.56) are associated with increased odds of IPV, and IPV increased more for food-insecure women post COVID-19 (compared to non-food insecure), but this was not statistically significant (confidence interval 0.76-8.69, p-value = 0.131). Young, newly married women experience high rates of IPV that increase with time in marriage, and COVID-19 has exacerbated this, especially for food-insecure women in the present sample. Along with enforcement of laws against IPV, our results suggest that special attention needs to be paid to women during a crisis time like the current COVID-19 pandemic, especially those who experience other household stressors.

BackgroundA growing body of evidence indicates that some people seek options to terminate a pregnancy without medical assistance, but experiences doing so have largely been documented only among people accessing a clinic-based abortion. We aim to describe self-managed abortion (SMA) experiences of people recruited outside of clinics, including their motivations for SMA, pregnancy confirmation and decision-making processes, method choices, and clinical outcomes.MethodsIn 2017, we conducted 14 in-depth interviews with self-identified females of reproductive age who recently reported in an online survey administered to Ipsos' KnowledgePanel that, since 2000, they had attempted SMA while living in the United States. We asked participants about their reproductive histories, experiences seeking reproductive health care, and SMA experiences. We used an iterative process to develop codes and analyzed transcripts using thematic content analysis methods.ResultsMotivations and perceptions of effectiveness varied by whether participants had confirmed the pregnancy prior to SMA. Participants who confirmed their pregnancies chose SMA because it was convenient, accessible, and private. Those who did not test for pregnancy were motivated by a preference for autonomy and felt empowered by the ability to try something on their own before seeking facility-based care. Participants prioritized methods that were safe and available, though not always effective. Most used herbs or over-the-counter medications; none used self-sourced abortion medications, mifepristone and/or misoprostol. Five participants obtained facility-based abortions and one participant decided to continue the pregnancy after attempting SMA. The remaining eight reported being no longer pregnant after SMA. None of the participants sought care for  SMA complications; one participant saw a provider to confirm abortion completion.ConclusionsThere are many types of SMA experiences. In addition to th

ObjectivesTo assess changes in Texas-resident border-state abortions, medication abortions, and abortions ≥22 weeks from last menstrual period (LMP) before and after implementation of House Bill 2 (HB2) in November 2013 and before and after the US Supreme Court's decision regarding HB2 in June 2016.Study designWe conducted an interrupted time series analysis using 2012-2017 data on Texas-resident abortions in Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. Data on procedure type and gestational age were available only for abortions in New Mexico.ResultsBorder states reported 762 Texas-resident abortions in 2012, 1,673 in 2014, and 1,475 in 2017. Texas-resident abortions in all border states nearly doubled following HB2's implementation (incidence rate ratio [IRR]=1.92, 95% CI: 1.67-2.20). Border-state abortions then decreased by 19% after the 2016 US Supreme Court decision, compared to the period prior to the decision and after HB2's implementation (IRR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.73-0.91). From 2012 to 2014, the proportion of Texas-resident abortions in New Mexico that were medication abortion increased from 5% to 20% (p < 0.001) and the proportion that were ≥22 weeks from LMP decreased from 40% to 23% (p < p<0.001). Texas vital statistics undercounted annual out-of-state abortions, reporting only 13%-73% of abortions reported by border-state clinics during the study period.ConclusionsHB2 was associated with increases in border-state abortions for Texas residents, including in the number of those ≥22 weeks from LMP. Border-state abortions declined after the Supreme Court ruled HB2 unconstitutional yet remained higher than pre-HB2 levels.Implications statementAbortion restrictions that severely curtail access may result in increases in travel out of state for care. Documenting out-of-state abortions is important for evaluating broader policy impacts and to prepare for future service disruptions. Texas residents may have more limited options for care if border states ena

BackgroundIntimate partner violence and nonpartner violence are common in Nepal, yet the relationship between violence and fertility is unclear. The risk of violence for young, newly married women in Nepal may be associated with becoming pregnant and giving birth due to either the family's desire to protect the fetus (reducing violence) or the added household stressors that accompany a pregnancy (increasing violence).ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate changes in partner and nonpartner violence over time in early marriage and explore the hypothesis that conception and childbirth may be associated with risk of domestic violence.Study designWe surveyed newly married women aged 18 to 25 years and living in the Nawalparasi district of Nepal in 4 rounds of data collection at 6-month intervals over 2 years. At each survey, interviewers asked whether participants had experienced any violence within the previous 6 months, including details about the type and perpetrator of the violence, and whether they had ever been pregnant or given birth.ResultsA cohort of 200 participants completed the baseline survey and 183 (92%) completed all 4 survey rounds. The proportion of participants experiencing any recent violence increased substantially over time. By the end of the study, 58% of participants reported experiencing intimate partner violence, nonpartner violence, or both in the previous 6 months. Most participants had been pregnant (148 [79%]) and given birth (117 [64%]) during the study period. Multivariate models were used to estimate the odds of any intimate partner violence during the previous 6 months. The odds of experiencing any intimate partner violence were more than 2 times higher for participants who became pregnant (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-4.7) and gave birth (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-7.2) than for those who did not. After adjusting for covariates, pregnancy and birth were not statistically associated with a change in

Since 2017, San Franciscos Paid Parental Leave Ordinance (PPLO) has allowed parents who work for private-sector employers to take 6 weeks of fully paid postnatal parental leave. Previous studies have linked paid parental leave with health improvements for birthing people and babies, although evidence for birth outcomes is limited. We hypothesized that the PPLO may have improved birth outcomes via reduced stress during pregnancy due to anticipation of increased financial security and postnatal leave. We used linked California birth certificate and hospital discharge records from January 2013 to December 2018 (n = 1,420,781). We used quasi-experimental difference-in-difference (DD) models to compare outcomes among SF births before and after PPLO to outcomes among births in control counties. Births from January 2017 through December 2018 among working San Francisco (SF) people were considered exposed to PPLO; births during this time among working people outside of SF, as well as all births before 2017, served as controls. We conducted subgroup analyses by race/ethnicity, education and Medicaid coverage at delivery. Overall analyses adjusting for covariates and indicators for time and seasonality indicated no association between PPLO and birth outcomes. Our results indicate that PPLO may not have affected the birth outcomes we examined among marginalized groups who, due to structural racism, are at heightened risk of poor outcomes. We speculate that this result is due to the PPLOs design and focus on postnatal leave. Future work should examine the policys effects on other outcomes.

Objective(s)To estimate the effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of medication abortion with mifepristone dispensed by a mail-order pharmacy after in-person clinical assessment.Study designThis is an interim analysis of an ongoing prospective cohort study conducted at five sites. Clinicians assessed patients in clinic and, if they were eligible for medication abortion and ≤ 63 days' gestation, electronically sent prescriptions for mifepristone 200 mg orally and misoprostol 800 mcg buccally to a mail-order pharmacy, which shipped medications for next-day delivery. Participants completed surveys three and 14 days after enrollment, and we abstracted medical chart data.ResultsBetween January 2020 and April 2021 we enrolled 240 participants and obtained clinical outcome information for 227 (94.6%); 3 reported not taking either medication. Of those with abortion outcome information (N = 224), 216 (96.4%) completed day-3 and 212 (94.6%) day-14 surveys. Of the 224 that took medications, none reported taking past 70 days' gestation, and complete medication abortion occurred for 217 participants (96.9%, 95% CI 93.7%-98.7%). Most received medications within three days (82.1%, 95% CI 76.5%-86.9%). In the day-3 survey, 95.4% (95% CI 91.7%-97.8%) reported being very (88.4%) or somewhat (6.9%) satisfied with receiving medications by mail. In the day-14 survey, 89.6% (95% CI 84.7%-93.4%) said they would use the mail-order service again if needed. Eleven (4.9%, 95% CI 2.5%-8.6%) experienced adverse events; two were serious (one blood transfusion, one hospitalization), and none were related to mail-order pharmacy dispensing.ConclusionsMedication abortion with mail-order pharmacy dispensing of mifepristone appears effective, feasible, and acceptable to patients.ImplicationsThe in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone, codified in the drug's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, should be removed.

ObjectiveTo estimate effectiveness and acceptability of medication abortion with mifepristone dispensed by pharmacists.MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study at eight clinical sites and pharmacies in California and Washington State from July 2018 to March 2020. Pharmacists at participating pharmacies underwent a 1-hour training on medication abortion. We approached patients who had already been evaluated, counseled, and consented for medication abortion per standard of care. Patients interested in study participation gave consent, and the clinician electronically sent a prescription to the pharmacy for mifepristone 200 mg orally, followed 24-48 hours later by misoprostol 800 micrograms buccally. Participants were sent web-based surveys about their experience and outcomes on days 2 and 14 after enrollment and had routine follow-up with study sites. We extracted demographic and clinical data, including abortion outcome and adverse events, from medical records. We performed multivariable logistic regression to assess the association of pharmacy experience and other covariates with satisfaction.ResultsWe enrolled 266 participants and obtained clinical outcome information for 262 (98.5%), of whom two reported not taking either medication. Of the 260 participants with abortion outcome information, 252 (96.9%) and 237 (91.2%) completed day 2 and 14 surveys, respectively. Complete medication abortion (primary outcome) occurred for 243 participants (93.5%, 95% CI 89.7-96.1%). Four participants (1.5%, 95% CI 0.4-3.9%) had an adverse event, none of which was serious or related to pharmacist dispensing. In the day 2 survey, 91.3% (95% CI 87.1-94.4%) of participants reported satisfaction with the pharmacy experience. In the day 14 survey, 84.4% (95% CI 79.1-88.8%) reported satisfaction with the medication abortion experience. Those reporting being very satisfied with the pharmacy experience had higher odds of reporting overall satisfaction with medication abortion (adjus

ObjectiveTo estimate effectiveness and acceptability of medication abortion with mifepristone dispensed by pharmacists.MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study at eight clinical sites and pharmacies in California and Washington State from July 2018 to March 2020. Pharmacists at participating pharmacies underwent a 1-hour training on medication abortion. We approached patients who had already been evaluated, counseled, and consented for medication abortion per standard of care. Patients interested in study participation gave consent, and the clinician electronically sent a prescription to the pharmacy for mifepristone 200 mg orally, followed 24-48 hours later by misoprostol 800 micrograms buccally. Participants were sent web-based surveys about their experience and outcomes on days 2 and 14 after enrollment and had routine follow-up with study sites. We extracted demographic and clinical data, including abortion outcome and adverse events, from medical records. We performed multivariable logistic regression to assess the association of pharmacy experience and other covariates with satisfaction.ResultsWe enrolled 266 participants and obtained clinical outcome information for 262 (98.5%), of whom two reported not taking either medication. Of the 260 participants with abortion outcome information, 252 (96.9%) and 237 (91.2%) completed day 2 and 14 surveys, respectively. Complete medication abortion (primary outcome) occurred for 243 participants (93.5%, 95% CI 89.7-96.1%). Four participants (1.5%, 95% CI 0.4-3.9%) had an adverse event, none of which was serious or related to pharmacist dispensing. In the day 2 survey, 91.3% (95% CI 87.1-94.4%) of participants reported satisfaction with the pharmacy experience. In the day 14 survey, 84.4% (95% CI 79.1-88.8%) reported satisfaction with the medication abortion experience. Those reporting being very satisfied with the pharmacy experience had higher odds of reporting overall satisfaction with medication abortion (adjus

BackgroundDespite legalization of abortion in Nepal in 2002, many women are still unable to access legal services. This paper examines providers' views, experiences with abortion denial, and knowledge related to abortion provision, and identifies areas for improvement in quality of care.MethodsWe conducted a structured survey with 106 abortion care providers at 55 government-approved safe abortion facilities across five districts of Nepal in 2017. We assessed reasons for denial of abortion care, knowledge about laws, barriers to provision and attitudes towards abortion.ResultsAlmost all providers (96%) reported that they have ever refused clients for abortion services. Common reasons included beyond 12 weeks gestation (93%), sex selective abortion (86%), and medical contraindications (85%). One in four providers denied abortion for lack of drugs or trained personnel, and one third denied services when they perceived that the woman's reasons for abortion were insufficient. Only a third of providers knew all three legal indications for abortion -- less than or equal to 12 weeks of pregnancy on request, up to 18 weeks for rape or incest, and any time for maternal or fetal health risk. Overall, providers were in favor of legal abortion but a substantial proportion had mixed or negative attitudes about the service.ConclusionsImprovements in training to address providers' inadequate knowledge about the abortion law may reduce inappropriate denial of abortion. Establishing referral networks in the case of abortion denial and ensuring regular supply of medical abortion drugs would help more women access abortion care in Nepal.

BackgroundDespite legalization of abortion in Nepal in 2002, many women are still unable to access legal services. This paper examines providers' views, experiences with abortion denial, and knowledge related to abortion provision, and identifies areas for improvement in quality of care.MethodsWe conducted a structured survey with 106 abortion care providers at 55 government-approved safe abortion facilities across five districts of Nepal in 2017. We assessed reasons for denial of abortion care, knowledge about laws, barriers to provision and attitudes towards abortion.ResultsAlmost all providers (96%) reported that they have ever refused clients for abortion services. Common reasons included beyond 12 weeks gestation (93%), sex selective abortion (86%), and medical contraindications (85%). One in four providers denied abortion for lack of drugs or trained personnel, and one third denied services when they perceived that the woman's reasons for abortion were insufficient. Only a third of providers knew all three legal indications for abortion -- less than or equal to 12 weeks of pregnancy on request, up to 18 weeks for rape or incest, and any time for maternal or fetal health risk. Overall, providers were in favor of legal abortion but a substantial proportion had mixed or negative attitudes about the service.ConclusionsImprovements in training to address providers' inadequate knowledge about the abortion law may reduce inappropriate denial of abortion. Establishing referral networks in the case of abortion denial and ensuring regular supply of medical abortion drugs would help more women access abortion care in Nepal.

BackgroundIn 2006, Colombia's constitutional court overturned a complete ban on abortion, liberalizing the procedure. Despite a relatively liberal new law, women still struggle to access safe and legal abortion services. We aimed to understand why women are denied services in Colombia, and what factors determine if and how they ultimately terminate pregnancies.MethodsWe recruited women denied abortion at a private facility in Bogota. Twenty-one participants completed an initial interview and eight completed a second longer interview. Two researchers documented themes and developed and applied a codebook to transcripts using ATLAS.ti.ResultsParticipants faced barriers, such as lack of knowledge of service availability and delayed pregnancy recognition, leading to denial. Five out of eight participants ultimately received abortions in public hospitals, due to support from partners and a robust referral system; nevertheless, they received poor care. Those who continued pregnancies endured stigmatizing events and inaccurate medical counselling at referral facilities. Several women contemplated illegal abortion though were afraid to attempt it.ConclusionWe propose the following recommendations: 1) increase awareness about availability and legality of abortion services to prevent delay and consequent denial; 2) provide counseling and referral upon denial; and 3) train providers in interpersonal quality abortion care.

BackgroundIn settings where abortion is legally restricted, or permitted but not widely accessible, women face significant barriers to abortion access, sometimes leading them to seek services outside legal facilities. The advent of medication abortion has further increased the prevalence of informal sector abortion. This study investigates the reasons for attempting self-induction, methods used, complications, and sources of information about informal sector abortion, and tests a specific recruitment method which could lead to improved estimates of informal sector abortion prevalence among an at-risk population.MethodsWe recruited women who have sought informal sector abortion services in Cape Town, South Africa using respondent driven sampling (RDS). An initial seed recruiter was responsible for initiating recruitment using a structured coupon system. Participants completed face-to-face questionnaires, which included information about demographics, informal sector abortion seeking, and safe abortion access needs.ResultsWe enrolled 42 women, nearly one-third of whom reported they were sex workers. Thirty-four women (81%) reported having had one informal sector abortion within the past 5 years, 14% reported having had two, and 5% reported having had three. These women consumed home remedies, herbal mixtures from traditional healers, or tablets from an unregistered provider. Twelve sought additional care for potential warning signs of complications. Privacy and fear of mistreatment at public sector facilities were among the main reported reasons for attempting informal sector abortion. Most women (67%) cited other community members as their source of information about informal sector abortion; posted signs and fliers in public spaces also served as an important source of information.ConclusionsWomen are attempting informal sector abortion because they seek privacy and fear mistreatment and stigma in health facilities. Some were unaware how or where to seek formal sect

BackgroundIn settings where abortion is legally restricted, or permitted but not widely accessible, women face significant barriers to abortion access, sometimes leading them to seek services outside legal facilities. The advent of medication abortion has further increased the prevalence of informal sector abortion. This study investigates the reasons for attempting self-induction, methods used, complications, and sources of information about informal sector abortion, and tests a specific recruitment method which could lead to improved estimates of informal sector abortion prevalence among an at-risk population.MethodsWe recruited women who have sought informal sector abortion services in Cape Town, South Africa using respondent driven sampling (RDS). An initial seed recruiter was responsible for initiating recruitment using a structured coupon system. Participants completed face-to-face questionnaires, which included information about demographics, informal sector abortion seeking, and safe abortion access needs.ResultsWe enrolled 42 women, nearly one-third of whom reported they were sex workers. Thirty-four women (81%) reported having had one informal sector abortion within the past 5 years, 14% reported having had two, and 5% reported having had three. These women consumed home remedies, herbal mixtures from traditional healers, or tablets from an unregistered provider. Twelve sought additional care for potential warning signs of complications. Privacy and fear of mistreatment at public sector facilities were among the main reported reasons for attempting informal sector abortion. Most women (67%) cited other community members as their source of information about informal sector abortion; posted signs and fliers in public spaces also served as an important source of information.ConclusionsWomen are attempting informal sector abortion because they seek privacy and fear mistreatment and stigma in health facilities. Some were unaware how or where to seek formal

BackgroundIn 2006, Colombia's constitutional court overturned a complete ban on abortion, liberalizing the procedure. Despite a relatively liberal new law, women still struggle to access safe and legal abortion services. We aimed to understand why women are denied services in Colombia, and what factors determine if and how they ultimately terminate pregnancies.MethodsWe recruited women denied abortion at a private facility in Bogota. Twenty-one participants completed an initial interview and eight completed a second longer interview. Two researchers documented themes and developed and applied a codebook to transcripts using ATLAS.ti.ResultsParticipants faced barriers, such as lack of knowledge of service availability and delayed pregnancy recognition, leading to denial. Five out of eight participants ultimately received abortions in public hospitals, due to support from partners and a robust referral system; nevertheless, they received poor care. Those who continued pregnancies endured stigmatizing events and inaccurate medical counselling at referral facilities. Several women contemplated illegal abortion though were afraid to attempt it.ConclusionWe propose the following recommendations: 1) increase awareness about availability and legality of abortion services to prevent delay and consequent denial; 2) provide counseling and referral upon denial; and 3) train providers in interpersonal quality abortion care.

BackgroundAbout one quarter of women in Bangladesh are denied menstrual regulation (MR) due to advanced gestation [J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 41(3):161-163, 2015, Issues Brief (Alan Guttmacher Inst) (3):1-8, 2012]. Little is known about barriers to MR services, and whether women denied MR seek abortion elsewhere, self-induce, or continue the pregnancy.MethodsAfter obtaining authorization from four health facilities in Bangladesh, we recruited eligible and interested women in to the study and requested informed consent for study participation. We conducted in-depth interviews with 20 women denied MR from four facilities in four districts in Bangladesh. Interviews were translated and transcribed, and the transcripts were analyzed by two researchers through an iterative process using a qualitative content analysis approach.ResultsOf those interviewed, 12 women sought abortion elsewhere and eight of these women were successful; four women who sought subsequent services were denied again. Two of the eight women who subsequently terminated their pregnancies suffered from complications. None of the participants were aware of the legal gestational limit for government-approved MR services. Given that all participants were initially denied services because they were beyond the legal gestational limit for MR and there were no reported risks to any of the mothers' health, we presume that the eight terminations performed subsequently were done illegally.ConclusionsBarriers to seeking safe MR services need to be addressed to reduce utilization of potentially unsafe alternative abortion services and to improve women's health and well being in Bangladesh. Findings from this study indicate a need to raise awareness about legal MR services; provide information to women on where, how and when they can access these services; train more MR providers; improve the quality and safety of second trimester services; and strengthen campaigns to educate women about contraception and pregna

ObjectivesTo understand how relationship status influences contraceptive use among young people.Study designData were collected as part of a longitudinal study on hormonal contraception among unmarried adolescent and young women who wanted to avoid pregnancy for at least one year, recruited at family planning clinics in the San Francisco Bay Area. Follow-up surveys were completed at 3, 6, and 12months. Longitudinal analysis was used to examine whether relationship characteristics, including type and length of sexual relationship are associated with current use of effective contraception.ResultsAmong women with a partner at baseline, 78%, 70%, and 61% had the same partner at 3, 6, and 12months follow up, respectively. Women in casual relationships were less likely to use effective contraceptive methods, compared to women in consistent relationships (AOR=0.67, p<.01). Women in new relationships (0-3months) were less likely to use effective contraceptive methods (AOR=0.60, p<.001) compared to women in relationships more than one year in length. Younger women (AOR=0.76, p<.05), black women (AOR=0.67, p<.05) and Latina women (AOR=0.73, p<.05) were also significantly less likely to use effective contraception. These effects remained even after controlling for condom use.ConclusionsRelationship type and length are independently significantly associated with current effective contraceptive use among adolescent and young women. Women in casual relationships and new relationships were significantly less likely to use effective contraceptive methods.ImplicationsFamily planning providers should discuss women's relationship context and association with contraceptive use in order to help women think of contraception as a long-term personal strategy. Since relationship status affects contraceptive use, providers and programs that aim to reduce unintended pregnancy can consider strategies to create a paradigm shift around contraceptive use that focuses on the woman's

BackgroundAbout one quarter of women in Bangladesh are denied menstrual regulation (MR) due to advanced gestation [J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 41(3):161-163, 2015, Issues Brief (Alan Guttmacher Inst) (3):1-8, 2012]. Little is known about barriers to MR services, and whether women denied MR seek abortion elsewhere, self-induce, or continue the pregnancy.MethodsAfter obtaining authorization from four health facilities in Bangladesh, we recruited eligible and interested women in to the study and requested informed consent for study participation. We conducted in-depth interviews with 20 women denied MR from four facilities in four districts in Bangladesh. Interviews were translated and transcribed, and the transcripts were analyzed by two researchers through an iterative process using a qualitative content analysis approach.ResultsOf those interviewed, 12 women sought abortion elsewhere and eight of these women were successful; four women who sought subsequent services were denied again. Two of the eight women who subsequently terminated their pregnancies suffered from complications. None of the participants were aware of the legal gestational limit for government-approved MR services. Given that all participants were initially denied services because they were beyond the legal gestational limit for MR and there were no reported risks to any of the mothers' health, we presume that the eight terminations performed subsequently were done illegally.ConclusionsBarriers to seeking safe MR services need to be addressed to reduce utilization of potentially unsafe alternative abortion services and to improve women's health and well being in Bangladesh. Findings from this study indicate a need to raise awareness about legal MR services; provide information to women on where, how and when they can access these services; train more MR providers; improve the quality and safety of second trimester services; and strengthen campaigns to educate women about contraception and pregna

ObjectivesTo understand how relationship status influences contraceptive use among young people.Study designData were collected as part of a longitudinal study on hormonal contraception among unmarried adolescent and young women who wanted to avoid pregnancy for at least one year, recruited at family planning clinics in the San Francisco Bay Area. Follow-up surveys were completed at 3, 6, and 12months. Longitudinal analysis was used to examine whether relationship characteristics, including type and length of sexual relationship are associated with current use of effective contraception.ResultsAmong women with a partner at baseline, 78%, 70%, and 61% had the same partner at 3, 6, and 12months follow up, respectively. Women in casual relationships were less likely to use effective contraceptive methods, compared to women in consistent relationships (AOR=0.67, p<.01). Women in new relationships (0-3months) were less likely to use effective contraceptive methods (AOR=0.60, p<.001) compared to women in relationships more than one year in length. Younger women (AOR=0.76, p<.05), black women (AOR=0.67, p<.05) and Latina women (AOR=0.73, p<.05) were also significantly less likely to use effective contraception. These effects remained even after controlling for condom use.ConclusionsRelationship type and length are independently significantly associated with current effective contraceptive use among adolescent and young women. Women in casual relationships and new relationships were significantly less likely to use effective contraceptive methods.ImplicationsFamily planning providers should discuss women's relationship context and association with contraceptive use in order to help women think of contraception as a long-term personal strategy. Since relationship status affects contraceptive use, providers and programs that aim to reduce unintended pregnancy can consider strategies to create a paradigm shift around contraceptive use that focuses on the woman's

Barriers to accessing legal abortion services in Tunisia are increasing, despite a liberal abortion law, and women are often denied wanted legal abortion services. In this paper, we seek to explore the reasons for abortion denial and whether these reasons had a legal or medical basis. We also identify barriers women faced in accessing abortion and make recommendations for improved access to quality abortion care. We recruited women immediately after they had been turned away from legal abortion services at two facilities in Tunis, Tunisia. Thirteen women consented to participate in qualitative interviews two months after they were turned away from the facility. Women were denied abortion care on the day they were recruited due to three main reasons: gestational age, health conditions, and logistical barriers. Nine women ultimately terminated their pregnancies at another facility, and four women carried to term. None of the women attempted illegal abortion services or self-induction. Further research is needed in order to assess abortion denial from the perspective of providers and medical staff.

Barriers to accessing legal abortion services in Tunisia are increasing, despite a liberal abortion law, and women are often denied wanted legal abortion services. In this paper, we seek to explore the reasons for abortion denial and whether these reasons had a legal or medical basis. We also identify barriers women faced in accessing abortion and make recommendations for improved access to quality abortion care. We recruited women immediately after they had been turned away from legal abortion services at two facilities in Tunis, Tunisia. Thirteen women consented to participate in qualitative interviews two months after they were turned away from the facility. Women were denied abortion care on the day they were recruited due to three main reasons: gestational age, health conditions, and logistical barriers. Nine women ultimately terminated their pregnancies at another facility, and four women carried to term. None of the women attempted illegal abortion services or self-induction. Further research is needed in order to assess abortion denial from the perspective of providers and medical staff.