scholarly journals COVID ‐19 and Immigrants’ Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health Services in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila Desai ◽  
Goleen Samari
2022 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-12
Author(s):  
Anna W. Brittain ◽  
Riley J. Steiner ◽  
Amy M. Fasula ◽  
Kendra Hatfield-Timajchy ◽  
Aniket Kulkarni ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 142-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Marie Harvey ◽  
Meredith R. Branch ◽  
Deanne Hudson ◽  
Antonio Torres

This study explored factors that affect access to and use of sexual and reproductive health services including family planning among immigrant Latino men residing in rural Oregon communities that have experienced a high growth in their Latino population. In-depth interviews were conducted with 49 sexually active men aged 18 to 30 years who recently immigrated to the United States. Findings from content analysis identified multiple overlapping individual-level barriers, including lack of knowledge, perception of personal risk for unintended pregnancy and STIs, and fear of disease. On a service delivery level, structural factors and the importance of confianza when interacting with providers and clinic staff were dominant themes. The majority of these themes were grounded in a cultural context and linked to men’s cultural background, beliefs, and experiences. Examining the needs of immigrant Latino men through this cultural lens may be critically important for improving access and use of sexual and reproductive health services.


1989 ◽  
Vol 15 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 233-243
Author(s):  
Edward R. Grant

The immediate impact of Webster v. Reproductive Health Services on the majority of abortions performed in the United States will be marginal. Even if most states enact provisions similar to those approved in Webster, no abortions would be outlawed, and only abortions performed after viability or performed in public hospitals would be directly affected. At one point, Webster had the potential for breaking new constitutional ground on the extent to which states may restrict counseling for abortion in state facilities, and by state employees. However, due to Missouri's failure to appeal the invalidation of some of these provisions, and to the limiting construction given to the provisions that were appealed, these issues were not fully joined before the Supreme Court. Their resolution is postponed to another day.


2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Mueller ◽  
Marielle Kirstein ◽  
Alicia VandeVusse ◽  
Laura Lindberg

Background: Abortion is a difficult-to-measure behavior with extensive survey underreporting, which compromises the ability to study and monitor abortion. The purpose of this study was to improve our understanding of how women interpret and respond to survey items asking if they have ever had an abortion. Methods: We developed multiple new questions hypothesized to improve abortion reporting, using approaches that aim to clarify which experiences to report as an induced abortion; reduce the stigma and sensitivity of induced abortion; reduce the sense of intrusiveness of asking about abortion; and increase the motivation to report. We conducted cognitive interviews with cisgender women aged 18-49 in two US states (N=64) to iteratively assess these new approaches and questions for improving abortion reporting. Results: Our findings suggest that including abortion as part of a list of other sexual and reproductive health services, asking a yes/no question about lifetime experience of abortion instead of asking about number of abortions, and developing an improved introduction to abortion questions may help to elicit more accurate survey reports. Conclusions: Opportunities exist to improve survey measurement of abortion. Reducing underreporting of abortion in surveys has the potential to improve sexual and reproductive health research that relies on pregnancy histories.


2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Persano

Negli Stati Uniti il dibattito sull’aborto è un tema sempre molto caldo. Questo saggio, diviso in due parti (la seconda parte sarà pubblicata sul prossimo numero della rivista) prova a ripercorrere l’evoluzione della giurisprudenza costituzionale statunitense in materia d’aborto, evidenziando i cambiamenti che ciascuna decisione ha apportato al quadro giuridico precedente. In questa prima parte viene chiarito anzitutto il meccanismo di funzionamento del sistema di giustizia costituzionale statunitense e il ruolo della Corte Suprema Americana nell’ordinamento giudiziario. Viene poi dato spazio ai prodromi di Roe v. Wade (che è la prima sentenza importante in materia d’aborto), ed in particolare alle sentenze che hanno pronunciato il diritto all’uso degli anticoncezionali: fra queste Griswold v. Connecticut ed Eisenstadt v. Baird. È anche importante la decisione United States v. Vuitch del 1971, che già si occupa dell’aborto ed interpreta la Costituzione nel senso di una tendenza alla liberalizzazione. La sentenza più importante è comunque la ben nota Roe v. Wade (1973), cui è dedicata un’ampia trattazione, con particolare attenzione ai passaggi della motivazione della Suprema Corte che hanno portato ad affermare il diritto all’aborto nella scansione trimestrale che poi è stata imitata anche dal legislatore italiano. Nel presente saggio vengono avanzate dure critiche a Roe v. Wade, critiche condivise – oltretutto – da alcuni giudici della Corte Suprema Americana, di cui si riportano stralci dell’opinione dissenziente. Accanto a Roe v. Wade, è molto importante anche la meno nota sentenza Doe v. Bolton dello stesso giorno, che precisò cosa dovesse intendersi per “salute della donna”: tale fattore era stato ritenuto da Roe v. Wade decisivo ai fini del riconoscimento della libertà di abortire. Con Doe v. Bolton la salute della donna viene estesa fino a ricomprendere praticamente qualsiasi cosa. Questa prima parte si conclude con l’analisi di alcune decisioni successive a Roe e Doe, ed in particolare Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, che costituisce in parte già un passo in controtendenza rispetto a Roe. Nel prossimo numero della rivista vedremo quali ulteriori cambiamenti ci sono stati nella giurisprudenza costituzionale statunitense in materia d’aborto. ---------- Abortion debate is always a hot subject in the United States. This essay, divided into two parts (the second part is going to be published on the next issue of this review) tries to go along the development of U.S. constitutional case-law about abortion, pointing out the change that each judgement caused to the previous law picture. In this first part, the functioning of U.S. constitutional judicial system and the role of U.S. Supreme Court in its judiciary are primarily explained. Then, some space is given to the premonitory signs of Roe v. Wade (that is the first important judgement about abortion), and to the judgement in particular that delivered the right to contraception: Griswold v. Connecticut and Eisenstadt v. Baird. Also United States v. Vuitch in 1971 is important: this judgement is already about abortion and interprets the Constitution in the trend of permission. However, the most important judgement is Roe v. Wade (1973): a wide treatment is dedicated to it, particularly to the passages about the Supreme Court reasoning that affirmed abortion right in the trimestral sharing, imitated by the italian legislator too. In this essay there are hard blames to Roe v. Wade: moreover, a few Supreme Court judges agree with blames and extracts of dissenting opinion are reported. Next to Roe v. Wade, also the less-known judgement Doe v. Bolton is very important: it is contemporary to Roe and it stated precisely what was “woman health”: this element was considered decisive by Roe in order to recognize the abortion right. In Doe v. Bolton woman health was enlarged and took in almost everything. This first part ends up with the analysis of a few following Roe and Doe judgements; in particular Webster v. Reproductive Health Services is a partial coming back as to Roe. In the next issue we will see the further subsequent changes in U.S. constitutional case-law about abortion.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document