Support for Health Insurance Coverage for Legal Abortion in the United States

The use of health insurance to cover legal abortion is a controversial issue on which Americans are sharply divided. Currently, there is a lack of research on this issue as data became available only recently. Using data from the newly released General Social Survey in 2018, this study examines who is more or less likely to support health insurance coverage for legal abortion. The results show that the support and opposition were about evenly divided. The findings from the logistic regression analysis reveal that, holding other variables constant, Democrats, liberals, urban residents, the more educated, and the older were more likely to support health insurance coverage for legal abortion while women, Southerners, Christians, the currently married, and those with more children were less likely to favor it, compared to their respective counterparts. Additionally, the effect of education was stronger for liberals than for non-liberals. Race, family income, and full-time work status make no difference in the outcome. The findings have significant implications for research and practices in health insurance coverage for legal abortion.

The Politics of Legal Abortion: From Direct Action to Dialogue

In her highly influential 1984 study Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood, Kristin Luker speculates that opposition to legal abortion among women was likely to be strongest among those who were full-time homemakers without a college education (Luker 1984, 163). But despite a marked decline in that demographic group and a well-documented rise in public support for gender equality since then, the rate of support for legal abortion has remained stubbornly fixed at between fifty and fifty-five percent (Shields 2012). This tepid support has coincided with a steep decline in abortion services in rural states, and ever more sweeping restrictions on abortion being tested in the courts (Rose 2006, 89). Karissa Haugeberg's Women against Abortion and Katie Watson's Scarlet A both seek to address this state of affairs, albeit in markedly different ways. Haugeberg provides a historical chronicle of the motives and strategies of certain key women activists in the fight against legal abortion, with an eye toward how their concerns “came to serve as blueprints to legislators and judges who continue to craft policies and laws that erode women's right to abortion” (Haugeberg, 8). Katie Watson draws upon her experience as an attorney and bioethicist to write a guide “intended to encourage and equip you to engage in respectful, productive, private conversation about your experience with, and opinion of, abortion” (Watson, 37). Though both authors reveal their support for legal abortion, both are concerned to understand the motives and goals of those who fight against it.

The legal implications of prenatal diagnosis in Malaysia

Background: Prenatal diagnosis enables detection of any disease or disability of the fetus during the pregnancy of a woman. Parents whose fetus is found to have a serious disorder from antenatal testing may terminate the pregnancy if it is permitted by the law or continue with the pregnancy to term. However, the chance of terminating a pregnancy may be denied if there is prenatal negligence by the medical practitioner in terms of diagnosis or failure to advise on the test results correctly. The purpose of this research is to examine the possible legal implications of prenatal diagnosis in Malaysia. Methods: This study adopts doctrinal legal research in which the researcher examines statutes and decided cases in Malaysia, the United Kingdom (UK) and Singapore relating to abortion, wrongful birth and wrongful life claims, in order to determine the legal implications of prenatal diagnosis in Malaysia. Results: In Malaysia, abortion following a prenatal diagnosis is only legally possible if the statutory criteria in the Penal Code are met. Abortion is illegal if it is not done for therapeutic purposes. A wrongful birth action brought by a woman who claims to be deprived of the opportunity to terminate her pregnancy may be successful in Malaysia, if it can be proven that a legal abortion could have been performed if not because of the prenatal negligence of the medical practitioner. However, a wrongful life action brought in the child’s name for being allowed to be born with a disability may not be viable since the claim could hardly be established and it is against the public policy. Conclusions: Theoretically, it is possible to bring a wrongful birth action resulted from negligence in prenatal diagnosis successfully in Malaysia, but the chance is relatively slim for wrongful life action.

About modern methods of clandestine abortion

Legalizing abortion had an important goal to get him out of the underground. But at the same time, the results of legalization opened up a new area for scientific research. The phenomenon, which until then was hidden about which, despite its colossal distribution, otherwise than with numerous omissions, is a sudden indentation to scientific analysis. This explains the numerous works of Russian authors devoted to the study of all aspects of legal abortion.

1409Legal abortion in the context of the COVID-19: a literature review focusing on Latin America

Background The COVID-19 pandemic changed the functioning of several health services. This work aimed to understand how different countries, especially Latin Americans, dealt with legal abortion ones. Methods Narrative review on abortion and COVID-19 from January 1st, 2020 to March 10th, 2021. Databases searched included MEDLINE (through LitCOVID), Global Index Medicus, Virtual Health Library, and Journal Storage, complemented by gray literature. Results Of the 668 documents found, 111 were duplicated. After thematic screening, 75 were included. The vast majority reinforced the importance of abortion as a reproductive right and the maintenance of abortion services during the pandemic as essentials. Medical protocols without prior testing and supported by telemedicine were proposed to respect the distance measures. The pandemic amplified existing problems and restricted access to sexual and reproductive health services, such as legal abortion. This impact may be even stronger in low- and middle-income countries, especially in Latin America, where access to legal abortion is usually restricted. However, empirical peer-reviewed studies in this region are still scarce. Conclusions Latin American countries must place reproductive rights as a priority on their agendas and adapt legislation to accommodate alternative models of abortion care, or else they are at risk of increasing rates of unsafe abortions and maternal mortality, especially among the most vulnerable women. Key messages Maintaining legal abortion services during the pandemic is essential, at the risk of increasing maternal mortality, especially in contexts where access to these services is already restricted, such as in Latin America.

Exploratory factorial structure of the experience induced abortion

From a review of studies on abortion, a non - random selection of 100 college students to reliability and validity eight subscales of norms, beliefs, values, perceptions, attitudes, motives, intentions and experiences concerning the request was made of assisted legal abortion. The results show that family standards affect experiences, but intentions and perceptions also impacted on them. In this regard, it is noted on the influence of more than rational support when the request for abortion, attend lectures on the subject, religious talks, consultations with experts, legal assistance procedures or curettage promoting affective processes. Such an exercise will allow to anticipate the effects of sexual health programs on student groups and the use of contraceptives.

“We don’t want problems”: reasons for denial of legal abortion based on conscientious objection in Mexico and Bolivia

Background The misuse of conscientious objection (CO) is a significant barrier to legal abortion access in many countries, especially in Latin America. We examine the reasons for denial of legal abortion services in Mexico and Bolivia and identify ways to mitigate the misuse of CO. Methods We conducted 34 in-depth interviews and 12 focus group discussions in two states in Mexico and four departments in Bolivia. Results were coded and categorized using a thematic analysis approach. Results Denial of abortion services based on CO is widespread in health facilities in Mexico and Bolivia and is primarily employed for reasons other than moral, religious, or ethical considerations. The main reasons for denial of services based on CO is lack of knowledge about abortion-related laws and fear of legal problems in abortion service provision. Conversely, the main reason to provide services is to comply with relevant laws. Denying services under the guise of CO negatively impacts pregnant people and health care teams, including fewer safe abortion options and increased workload and stigma, respectively. Most respondents cited training and education on abortion law as the foremost way to mitigate the negative impacts of the misuse of CO. Conclusions For many health personnel, knowing, understanding, and following the law is reason enough to provide abortion services. Individuals who object due to lack of knowledge about laws and fear of legal problems represent a key population that can be sensitized and equipped with the necessary information and resources to provide legal abortion services.