African Americans and abortion: An intriguing poll

Posted on February 13, 2013 by Carole Joffe and has no comments yet.

Graph of African American preferences regarding legality of abortionAmericans appears to be in a period of heightened support for abortion, as revealed in a number of recent national polls. In contrast to earlier polls, which typically showed the country split nearly 50-50 on the abortion question, exit polling on election day 2012 showed a considerably more lopsided degree of support for legal abortion, with 59% of respondents wanting abortion to remain legal (and an even higher 66% of Latinos/as offering this view).

After the election, in a much commented on Wall St. Journal poll taken around the time of the 40th anniversary of Roe v Wade in January, 70% of respondents stated their opposition to the decision being overturned, the highest number since 1989. Moreover, in contrast to previous polls, the same poll showed, for the first time, a majority support for abortion in all or most situations. As I suggested in a previous ANSIRH blog, these numbers appear to reflect the public’s reaction to the extremist views on abortion—and contraception as well—that were articulated by Republican candidates in the recent election season, from the Romney–Ryan ticket down to Senate and lower-level races.

But another poll, which has received far less attention, and which I stumbled upon in the course of preparing a webinar, is equally intriguing to me for what it says about emergent abortion politics. This was a poll performed by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) in July 2012, which surveyed African Americans and Hispanics on their attitudes about abortion, among other issues. (more…)

Categories: general interest, politics, research
Tags: , , , , , ,
 
 

When a pregnancy goes wrong in Catholic hospitals

Posted on February 4, 2013 by Lori Freedman and has 7 comments.

When a woman chooses a physician for pregnancy care, she’s often visualizing her baby’s birth. Will this doctor have the best skills and bedside manner to help with the delivery? If she’s high risk, does the doctor have extra training for that as well?

Rarely do prenatal patients ask: If something goes terribly wrong, will my doctor be able to provide emergency abortion care?

But perhaps they should.

(more…)

Categories: general interest, legal, policy & regulation, research, training
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
 
 

After Tiller

Posted on January 29, 2013 by Gretchen Sisson and has no comments yet.

Image for the film After TillerAfter Tiller opens with Dr. George Tiller talking about risk, and follows with the 911 call from his assassination on the steps of his church.

This is the story of abortion providers with which most people are familiar, one of threat and violence. Sundance Film Festival attendees were reminded of this last Friday before we even entered the film’s premiere screening in a building that, except for the two weeks in January when it becomes a movie theater, is a Jewish synagogue.

“No Firearms, Please” reads the sign on the temple door—printed in the same font as the “No Recording, Please” sign that is ubiquitous at screenings of other films at the festival. Inside were federal marshals, metal detectors, and private security. (more…)

Categories: general interest, policy & regulation
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 
 

The Alabama Supreme Court decision: Will it make delivering appropriate health care to pregnant women more difficult?

Posted on January 25, 2013 by Sarah Roberts and has no comments yet.

Photo of Alabama Supreme Court building

The Alabama Supreme Court recently decided that pregnant women can be prosecuted under a law intended to protect children from methamphetamine labs. Much of the resulting discussion has focused on the implications for “personhood” and on other instances in which women have been punished and prosecuted for their behavior while pregnant. Outrage at these prosecutions, and concern about the slippery slope they open up for abortion and for other behaviors pregnant women may engage in, are certainly appropriate responses. However, it is also important to ask: What are the implications of this decision for delivering recommended health-based interventions to pregnant women who use drugs?

While the evidence isn’t conclusive, there is some suggestion that prenatal care-based interventions—such as screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for drug use (also known collectively as SBIRT)—may help women have healthier babies. Many (but not all) leading national health organizations recommend SBIRT. Two key ingredients are necessary, however, for SBIRT to even have a chance of working:

  • First, pregnant women who use drugs need to go to prenatal care.
  • And second, they need to trust their prenatal health care providers.

Research my colleagues and I conducted suggests that the Alabama Supreme Court decision has implications for each of these ingredients.

(more…)

Categories: general interest, legal, policy & regulation, research
Tags: , , , ,
 
 

Roe v Wade, California abortion law, HWPP #171, and the future of access

Posted on January 17, 2013 by Tracy Weitz and has no comments yet.

Expanding access to abortion through training advanced practice clinicians

A newly published landmark study by ANSIRH demonstrates that trained nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives, and physician assistants match physicians in the safety of aspiration abortions they provide. We hope that these results will give policymakers the evidence they need to move beyond physician-only restrictions in order to enable more women to have their reproductive health care needs met in their local communities by health care providers they know and trust.

January 22, 2013 marks the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide. While abortion in California had been legal under more limited circumstances since 1967, Roe did have an effect on our law. It eliminated the need for a psychiatrist to approve a woman’s abortion, negated the requirement that abortions be performed in hospitals, and extended when a woman could have an abortion. But the law on the books didn’t change.

It wasn’t until 2000, when the FDA was poised to approve mifepristone (the “abortion pill”), that advocates considered asking the legislature to modernize the abortion law. Legal research in California confirmed that the state’s physician-only law would prohibit nurse practitioners (NPs), certified nurse midwives (CNMs), and physician assistants (PAs) from being able to offer women the abortion pill, thereby limiting the benefit of this new abortion option. Although they knew it wouldn’t be easy, advocates took on the challenge of reforming California’s abortion law. A lot of hard work paid off, and on January 1, 2003, California enacted a contemporary abortion law. Known as the Reproductive Privacy Act, SB1301 codified the Roe v. Wade standards and affirmed the legal right of NPs, CNMs, and PAs to perform abortions using medications.

One of the unsettled parts of the discussion over SB1301 was whether non-physician clinicians should be allowed to offer other types of low-risk abortion procedures. (more…)

Categories: general interest, policy & regulation, publications, research
Tags: , , , ,