Abortion attitudes in context: a multidimensional vignette approach

Can someone be both pro-life and pro-choice? Results from a national survey of US adults

"Pro-life" and "pro-choice" are closely associated with discussions about abortion; we refer to the extent that people identify with these terms as "abortion identity." Most polling measures present pro-life and pro-choice as mutually exclusive options, but there is a dearth of information about people who might simultaneously endorse both (or neither) labels.

METHOD

We administered a survey to adults in the United States (n = 580) that included two different formats for participants to select their abortion identity: a categorical item with response options ranging from strongly pro-choice to strongly pro-life (and "both" and "neither") and two separate items (sliders) that asked people the extent to which they identify with each term. We asked participants endorsing both pro-life and pro-choice to some extent on the slider items to explain their responses in an open-ended item. We used logistic regression to examine the relationship between participants' socio-demographic characteristics and the likelihood of dual identification slider scores; we analyzed open-ended data for content and themes.

RESULTS

On the sliders, more than 64% of participants identified as both pro-life and pro-choice to some extent. Variability existed between people's abortion identity on the close-ended items and their response to the open-ended questions. Among those with mixed abortion identities, participants described abortion as a serious and undesirable option but reflected positively on notions of personal choice and bodily autonomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate complexity in measuring people's endorsement of abortion identity labels. We recommend developing more nuanced and consistent measures to assess abortion attitudes.

Tanzanian adolescents' attitudes toward abortion: innovating video vignettes in survey research on health topics

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to pilot an innovative cartoon video vignette survey methodology to learn about young people's perspectives on abortion and sexual relationships in Tanzania. The Animating Children's Views methodology used videos shown on tablets to engage young people in conversations. Such conversations are complicated because abortion is highly stigmatized, inaccessible, and illegal in Tanzania.

METHODS

The cartoon video vignette methodology was conducted as a part of a quantitative survey using tablet computers. Hypothetical situations and euphemistic expressions were tested in order to engage adolescents on sensitive topics in low-risk ways. Qualitative interviews and focus groups validated and further explored the perspectives of the young respondents.

RESULTS

Results indicate that 12-17 year-olds usually understand euphemistic expressions for abortion and are aware of social stigma and contradictory norms surrounding abortion from as young as age twelve. Despite the risks involved with abortion, this study finds adolescents sometimes view abortion as a reasonable solution to allow a girl to remain in school. Additional findings show that as adolescents wrestle with how to respond to a schoolgirl's pregnancy, they are considering both the (un)affordability of healthcare services and also expectations for gender roles.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital data collection, such as the Animating Children's Views cartoon video vignettes used in this study, allows researchers to better understand girls' and boys' own perspectives on their experiences and reproductive health.

The "abortion imaginary": Shared perceptions and personal representations among everyday Americans

Drawing upon 217 in-depth interviews and the concept of the "social imaginary," we introduce the "abortion imaginary"-a set of shared understandings regarding abortion and abortion patients. We identify four interrelated facets of the U.S. abortion imaginary pertaining to who gets an abortion and why: maternal inevitability, economic decision-making, relationship precarity, and emotional fragility. We then show how shared perceptions of abortion patients diverge into polarized opinions, revealing how those who know someone who has had an abortion differ from those who do not. Centering personal "exemplars," we integrate conceptual work on social imaginaries with contact theory to illuminate how divergent opinions coexist with shared cultural understandings.

Analyzing Reddit Forums Specific to Abortion That Yield Diverse Dialogues Pertaining to Medical Information Seeking and Personal Worldviews: Data Mining and Natural Language Processing Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Attitudes toward abortion have historically been characterized via dichotomized labels, yet research suggests that these labels do not appropriately encapsulate beliefs on abortion. Rather, contexts, circumstances, and lived experiences often shape views on abortion into more nuanced and complex perspectives. Qualitative data have also been shown to underpin belief systems regarding abortion. Social media, as a form of qualitative data, could reveal how attitudes toward abortion are communicated publicly in web-based spaces. Furthermore, in some cases, social media can also be leveraged to seek health information.

OBJECTIVE

This study applies natural language processing and social media mining to analyze Reddit (Reddit, Inc) forums specific to abortion, including r/Abortion (the largest subreddit about abortion) and r/AbortionDebate (a subreddit designed to discuss and debate worldviews on abortion). Our analytical pipeline intends to identify potential themes within the data and the affect from each post.

METHODS

We applied a neural network-based topic modeling pipeline (BERTopic) to uncover themes in the r/Abortion (n=2151) and r/AbortionDebate (n=2815) subreddits. After deriving the optimal number of topics per subreddit using an iterative coherence score calculation, we performed a sentiment analysis using the Valence Aware Dictionary and Sentiment Reasoner to assess positive, neutral, and negative affect and an emotion analysis using the Text2Emotion lexicon to identify potential emotionality per post. Differences in affect and emotion by subreddit were compared.

RESULTS

The iterative coherence score calculation revealed 10 topics for both r/Abortion (coherence=0.42) and r/AbortionDebate (coherence=0.35). Topics in the r/Abortion subreddit primarily centered on information sharing or offering a source of social support; in contrast, topics in the r/AbortionDebate subreddit centered on contextualizing shifting or evolving views on abortion across various ethical, moral, and legal domains. The average compound Valence Aware Dictionary and Sentiment Reasoner scores for the r/Abortion and r/AbortionDebate subreddits were 0.01 (SD 0.44) and -0.06 (SD 0.41), respectively. Emotionality scores were consistent across the r/Abortion and r/AbortionDebate subreddits; however, r/Abortion had a marginally higher average fear score of 0.36 (SD 0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that people posting on abortion forums on Reddit are willing to share their beliefs, which manifested in diverse ways, such as sharing abortion stories including how their worldview changed, which critiques the value of dichotomized abortion identity labels, and information seeking. Notably, the style of discourse varied significantly by subreddit. r/Abortion was principally leveraged as an information and outreach source; r/AbortionDebate largely centered on debating across various legal, ethical, and moral abortion domains. Collectively, our findings suggest that abortion remains an opaque yet politically charged issue for people and that social media can be leveraged to understand views and circumstances surrounding abortion.

People's knowledge of and attitudes toward abortion laws before and after the Dobbs v. Jackson decision

Although media response to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision was widespread in the United States, the extent to which people were aware of the Mississippi law leading to the decision, the Dobbs v. Jackson case, is unclear, as are the resulting effects of the decision on legal abortion. As such, we examined people's awareness of abortion legality prior to and after the Dobbs v. Jackson decision announcement, as well as the potential implications associated with the decision (i.e. overturning of Roe v. Wade). We also examined people's attitudes toward abortion legality, specifically focusing on 15 weeks' gestation to correspond with the Mississippi law that led to Dobbs v. Jackson. Data were collected across two studies at different times. In Study 1, a 15-minute survey was administered to IPSOS' KnowledgePanel (N = 1014) prior to the decision announcement. A shorter version of that survey was administered to a second sample using NORC's AmeriSpeak Omnibus panel (N = 1002). Nearly half of that sample (42.2%) completed the survey prior to the decision announcement. People were generally unaware of the Mississippi law, the Dobbs v. Jackson case, and implications associated with the decision (e.g. overturning Roe v. Wade). People generally endorsed abortion being legal at 15 weeks or later, but this varied by circumstance. We did not find meaningful effects of the decision announcement on people's knowledge and attitudes. Our findings suggest that the intense response to the decision from the media and people involved in the abortion movement may not represent the general public's reaction.

Perceptions of abortion access across the United States prior to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision: Results from a national survey

CONTEXT

Abortion is common in the United States (US), although access is becoming more difficult for some. In addition to restrictive policies that ban most abortion, limit the number of providers and increase costs, barriers to access also include less supportive cultural climates and stigma related to abortion. Prior to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health decision of the United States Supreme Court, research suggested that people generally believed it was easy to access abortion, but this research did not examine the underlying factors that drive these perceptions.

METHODS

In 2019, using data from closed and open-ended survey questions, we examined differences in people's assessment of abortion access within the state they reside and factors that influence those perceptions. We recruited English- and Spanish-speaking US adults (N = 2599) from Qualtrics' national panel using quota-based sampling to participate in a web-based survey. We used multinomial logistic regression to examine predictors of access perceptions across demographic characteristics and thematic analysis to analyze open-ended responses.

RESULTS

Fifty-three percent of participants believed abortion was easy to access in their state. Spanish speakers and participants from legislatively "hostile" states were more likely to perceive access as difficult. Legality-related knowledge and pro-life identity were associated with perceiving abortion access as easy.

CONCLUSIONS

Prior to Dobbs, participants' interpretation of the ease or difficulty of accessing abortion were subjective. Misconceptions about state abortion laws and the prevalence of providers were common, suggesting a need for more education about abortion laws, policies, and access.

A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding the Disconnection between Perceptions of Abortion Acceptability and Support for Roe v. Wade among US Adults

The relationship between people's attitudes about abortion acceptability and the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade-two distinct but related issues-has not been rigorously explored. The authors used a mixed-methods approach for analyzing in-depth interviews to better understand how participants' feelings toward abortion acceptability are related to perceptions of whether abortion should be legal. The authors then assessed (1) correlations between abortion acceptability and different measures of support for Roe v. Wade, and (2) how the phrasing of survey items related to Roe v. Wade may evoke different responses via an online survey fielded in 2018. The study's qualitative results highlight that there is a disjuncture between people's moral feelings toward abortion and their attitudes toward abortion legality. The study's quantitative results further demonstrate that correlations between abortion acceptability and support for Roe v. Wade are moderate, and the differences in responses to the phrasing of survey items related to Roe v. Wade are moderated by knowledge. The authors recommend that when researchers develop survey items, they avoid ambiguities of abortion as a general construct, especially when public opinion measures on abortion are employed for research and the design of social and health policy and practice.

Perspectives on an early abortion ban in a restrictive US state: A qualitative exploration

OBJECTIVES

To gain a deeper understanding of perspectives on abortion and early abortion bans in a restrictive US state.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured Zoom interviews with residents of the US state Georgia's 6th Congressional District. Potential participants first completed a screening tool to recruit people who held "middle-of-the-spectrum" views on abortion based on two abortion questions on a 5-point Likert scale. The interviews focused on participants' thoughts and feelings on abortion and Georgia's early abortion ban. We transcribed, coded, and analyzed the interviews, and present a subset of themes.

RESULTS

We interviewed 28 people from March to May 2020. Participants often described holding complex views on abortion shaped by a range of lived experiences, values, and identities. They lamented the "black-and-white" nature of the national abortion discussion, which they felt oversimplified the issue and did not represent their views. Participants discussed the importance of experiences that allowed them to empathize with people who choose abortion, even when they personally felt they would make a different decision in a similar situation. Based on these experiences, many participants emphasized the importance of separating their own views on abortion from what needed to be regulated for others. However, participants often demonstrated a lack of understanding about the extent to which HB481 makes abortion inaccessible in Georgia.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that, even in states traditionally labeled as restrictive or hostile towards abortion, many people express an openness to understand others' experiences and hold complex and multifaceted views.

IMPLICATIONS

Our laws and policies at the state level profoundly affect the practice of medicine and access to care. Our study furthers our understanding of how a sample of people in a restrictive US state think and feel about abortion and early abortion bans. These results can be used to support educational efforts, policies, and communication practices that better reflect the complex views of the public.

Women's Attitudes Towards Abortion in Response to the Zika and COVID-19 Outbreaks in Brazil

Introduction

Abortion attitudes are influenced by people's socioeconomic and demographic circumstances and can be volatile during times of crisis. Brazil is an interesting case for examining abortion attitudes because of its strict abortion policies, changing religious landscape, high income inequality, and extreme uncertainty generated by the back-to-back Zika and COVID-19 crises. This study seeks to assess Brazilian women's attitudes toward abortion and whether religion and income explain these attitudes in the context of novel infectious disease epidemics.

Methods

We used data from a population-based sample of 3996 women ages 18-34 in Pernambuco, Brazil, collected during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (May-September 2020). We conducted paired t-tests and multivariate-adjusted logistic regression models with adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs to assess differences in support for abortion in the case of fetal congenital Zika syndrome (CZS), maternal Zika infection during pregnancy, and maternal COVID-19 infection during pregnancy.

Results

Significantly more women support the right to abortion in the case of fetal CZS (50%) than in the case of maternal Zika infection (40%) and maternal COVID-19 infection (31%). Support for abortion varies by income and religion. Controlling for other demographic characteristics, high-income women have higher odds of supporting abortion in the case of fetal CZS (aOR = 1.92; 95% CI: 1.25-2.94) and maternal Zika infection (aOR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.33-3.21) than low-income women. Evangelical women have lower odds of supporting abortion in the case of maternal Zika infection (aOR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.45-0.93) and marginally lower odds of supporting the right to abortion in the case of maternal COVID-19 infection (aOR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.47-1.00) than women of other religious affiliations.

Conclusions and Policy Implications

With increasingly conservative religious groups gaining size in Brazil, we expect to see increasing abortion restrictions. However, this research finds that a sizable portion of women across all incomes and religious affiliations support abortion, particularly in the case of fetal anomalies associated with Zika.

Alignment of state-level policies and public attitudes towards abortion legality and government restrictions on abortion in the United States

BACKGROUND

Contextual factors can shape public opinion towards abortion. We investigated the association between the state-level abortion legislative climate and individual attitudes towards abortion legality and government restrictions of abortion access in the United States.

METHODS

Data come from the 2020 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (n = 61,000). Using multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations, we explored whether state-level abortion policy climates (based on the Guttmacher Institute's 2020 rating of state abortion policies) were associated with individual attitudes (1) towards abortion legality, and (2) towards government restriction of abortion access, controlling for individual socio-demographic factors.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight percent of participants supported the legality of abortion in some or all circumstances. Conversely, 30% of the sample opposed all federal government restrictions on abortion. More than 60% of the sample lived in highly abortion-restrictive states. Participants living in states with a more supportive abortion legislative climate were more likely to support the legality of abortion in some or all circumstances (AOR = 1.07, (95% CI 1.05, 1.09). Participants in states with more supportive abortion policies were more likely to oppose federal governmental restrictions (AOR = 1.03, 95% CI 1.02, 1.04). Low religiosity, higher educational attainment, and politically liberal views were associated with increased support for abortion legality and increased opposition to government restrictions on abortion.

CONCLUSIONS

State-level abortion policy contexts were positively associated with public attitudes towards abortion. While attitudes towards abortion legality are favorable across the country; there is also strong support at least one type of government restriction on abortion access. Results highlight a disconnect between multifaceted public attitudes towards abortion and polarized state contexts, suggesting that policymaking on abortion represents a higher level of polarization than exists at the individual level. Policymakers and legislators should more carefully consider the desires of the public when designing abortion legislation.

Abortion vs. Sexual Assault: People's Perceptions of Kavanaugh's Nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States

Public reaction to Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States initially centered around abortion. However, approximately two months after the nomination, sexual assault accusations against Kavanaugh were made public. We examined the extent that people's perceptions of Kavanaugh's stance on abortion and people's attitudes toward whether Kavanaugh committed sexual assault were associated with perceptions of Kavanaugh as a good Supreme Court justice. Data were collected from English- and Spanish-speaking participants (N = 2,883) in the United States via Qualtrics' panel. Using an exploratory hierarchical regression approach, we found that people's perceptions of whether Kavanaugh committed sexual assault was a stronger predictor of their attitudes toward Kavanaugh's quality as a Supreme Court justice [F(1,2855) = 1736.54, p < .001] than people's perceptions of him regarding abortion, after controlling for demographic characteristics and participants' abortion identity (e.g., identifying as pro-life, pro-choice). That sexual assault was a stronger predictor could suggest the importance of sexual assault regarding opinions of Supreme Court justices or potential over inflation of abortion as a salient issue. Researchers should investigate the saliency of sexual and reproductive health issues in relation to Supreme Court nominees.

Pregnancy scares, pregnancy uncertainty, and abortion attitude change

Women's attitudes towards abortion are often assessed infrequently in their lives. This measurement may not capture how lifetime events, such as reproductive experiences, potentially influence attitudes towards abortion. Although reproductive attitudes can fluctuate with life's circumstances, there is little research on how abortion attitudes may change when a woman suspects she might be pregnant. Using an intensive longitudinal dataset collected in Michigan, the Relationship Dynamics and Social Life (RDSL) study (2008-2012), we test the relationship between the timing of pregnancy scares and uncertainty and abortion attitudes using hybrid effects models. We find that women become less supportive of abortion while experiencing a pregnancy scare or uncertainty; however, this association exists only during a scare or uncertainty. These findings highlight that abortion attitudes may change when a woman suspects she might be pregnant. However, attitudinal change may not last past this period.

Attitudes of US adults toward using telemedicine to prescribe medication abortion during COVID-19: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVES

We explored public opinion about using telemedicine to provide medication abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. We also investigated the associations between socio-demographic characteristics and support for using telemedicine in this context and explored factors that influenced respondents' attitudes on the topic.

STUDY DESIGN

In a nationally representative, web-based survey of US adults (n = 711), we asked open- and closed-ended questions about using telemedicine to prescribe medication abortion during COVID-19. We used multinomial logistic regression to assess the relationship between socio-demographic characteristics, endorsement of abortion labels, and political affiliation and support for telemedicine in this circumstance. Then, we conducted content and thematic analyses with the open-ended data to explore what influenced respondents' opinions.

RESULTS

Overall, 332 (44%) of respondents supported using telemedicine for medication abortion during the pandemic; 237 (35%) opposed and 138 (21%) were unsure. Respondents who identified as prochoice were more likely to support using telemedicine for abortion during the pandemic than those who identified as prolife were to oppose it in this context (RRR 2.95; 95% CI 1.31-6.64). Via our content and thematic analysis, we identified that concerns about safety, the legitimacy of telemedicine, and the belief that abortion should occur as early in the pregnancy as possible influenced respondents' beliefs about using telemedicine for medication abortion.

CONCLUSIONS

More respondents supported using telemedicine for medication abortion during COVID-19 than opposed it. Among respondents who expressed support, most thought that medication abortion was safe and that telemedicine was equivalent to the in-person provision of care.

IMPLICATIONS

There appears to be support among US adults for the provision of medication abortion via telemedicine during COVID-19. Policymakers may consider public sentiment as well as clinical evidence when considering legislation about abortion.

The Change in Attitudes Towards Abortion in Former West and East Germany After Reunification: A Latent Class Analysis and Implications for Abortion Access

Introduction The legal status of abortion has changed in the regions of former East Germany after reunification due to the adoption of restrictive West German abortion policies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact on attitudes towards abortion and the associated health care implications in Western and Eastern Germany.

Materials and Methods Nationally representative data on public support for legally restricting abortion access were taken from the German General Social Survey and included the surveys 1992, 1996, 2000, 2006 and 2012 (N = 14 459). Two indicators of barriers to access to abortion care were calculated for each federal state, based on the number of abortion facilities and the proportion of women seeking abortion outside their state of residency. Data were analysed using latent class analysis.

Results Results suggested that abortion attitudes could be classified into three distinct subgroups: 1) support for abortion access independent of womenʼs reason; 2) support on the basis of maternal or foetal health reasons but not for socio-economic reasons (e.g. financial restrictions); and 3) no support. The size of subgroups in favour of partial or complete restriction on abortion access increased in both regions over the study period and this trend could not be explained by changes in socio-demographic characteristics. Respondents living in a federal state with more barriers to access to abortion care were more likely to hold restrictive abortion attitudes.

Conclusion Negative attitudes towards abortion have increased in Western and Eastern Germany during the two decades following reunification and may harm women by limiting acceptability and accessibility of abortion care. Abortion policies, public discourse and provision of abortion care should be informed by international guidelines protecting womenʼs health and rights.

The abstract versus the concrete: differing opinions of medical residents in obstetrics and gynaecology about abortion and punishment of abortion

Purpose: To investigate the opinions of Brazilian medical residents in Obstetrics and Gynaecology on abortion legislation according to their personal beliefs.Material and methods: A multicentre cross-sectional study. Residents at 21 university teaching hospitals completed a self-report questionnaire on their opinions in abstract terms, and about punishing women who abort in general and women they know.Results: In abstract terms, 8% favoured allowing abortion under any circumstances (fully liberal); 36% under socioeconomic or psychological constraints (broadly liberal); 75.3% opposed punishing a woman who has aborted (liberal in general practice); and 90.2% opposed punishing women they knew personally (liberal in personal practice). Not having a stable partner and not being influenced by religion were factors associated with liberal opinions. In personal practice, however, 80% of those who are influenced by religion were liberal. The percentage of respondents whose opinions were liberal was significantly greater among those who believed that abortion rates would remain the same or decrease following liberalisation.Conclusions: Judgements regarding the penalisation of women who abort are strongly influenced by how close the respondent is to the problem. Accurate information on abortion needs to be provided. Although about one third of the respondents were broadly liberal, the majority oppose punishment.

Differences in abortion attitudes by policy context and between men and women in the World Values Survey

We explored whether abortion attitudes differed by respondents' sex and country-level abortion policy context. Data were collected between 2010 and 2014 from 69,901 respondents from 51 countries. Abortion attitudes were scored on a ten-point Likert scale (1 = "never justifiable"; 10 = "always justifiable"). Country-level abortion policy context was dichotomized as "less restrictive" or "more restrictive." We conducted linear regression modeling with cluster effects by country to assess whether respondents' sex and abortion policy context were associated with abortion attitudes, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics. On average, women had more supportive abortion attitude scores than men (Mean = 3.38 SD = 2.76 vs. Mean = 3.24 SD = 2.82, p < .001). Respondents in countries with more restrictive policy contexts had less supportive attitudes than those in less restrictive contexts (Mean = 2.55 SD = 2.39 vs. Mean = 4.09 SD = 2.96, p < .001). In regression models, abortion attitudes were more supportive among women than men (b = 0.276, p < .001) and in less restrictive versus more restrictive countries (b = 0.611, p < .001). Younger, educated, divorced, non-religious, and employed respondents had more supportive scores (all p < .05). Systematic differences were observed in abortion attitudes by respondents' sex and policy context, which have potential implications for women's autonomy and abortion access, which should be explored in future research.

Attitudes Toward Abortion After Receiving vs. Being Denied an Abortion in the USA

U.S. public attitudes toward abortion have been studied extensively, but little is known about these attitudes among women who seek abortion. This mixed-methods study explores women's attitudes about abortion after receiving or being denied an abortion. Data are from the Turnaway Study, a prospective, longitudinal study of women seeking abortions at 30 U.S. facilities. Participants presented just before a facility's gestational limit and received abortions, or just beyond the limit and were denied abortions. Using mixed effects logistic regression, we assessed 812 participants' attitudes about abortion over four years. At five years after abortion-seeking, we conducted in-depth interviews with 31 participants; this analysis includes the comments of 19 participants who discussed their abortion attitudes in those interviews. We find that six months after abortion-seeking, nearly all women supported abortion legality in all (80%) or some (18%) situations, yet 20% also believed abortion is morally wrong. Women denied an abortion were significantly less likely to support the legal right to abortion at six months (62%) and 4.5 years (77%) after abortion-seeking than women who had received a near-limit abortion (78% and 88%, respectively). In open-ended interviews, women expressed nuanced views, including reporting increased empathy for others facing an unwanted pregnancy. Women's own reproductive experiences impact their views on abortion. Distinguishing between morality and legality of abortion is critical in understanding abortion attitudes.

[Young Mexicans' attitudes towards voluntary interruption of pregnancy and opinions on unsafe abortion as a public health problem]

This study aimed to explore young Mexicans' attitudes towards induced abortion and its relationship to their opinions on unsafe abortion as a public health problem. The results were compared by participants' gender, age, religion, and course major. The sample consisted of 411 university students who answered a questionnaire on their attitudes towards abortion and another questionnaire on unsafe abortion. Participants showed more favorable than unfavorable attitudes towards induced abortion. They generally acknowledged that unsafe abortion poses a health risk, but they were not sure whether legislation would help solve the problem. Male students and those professing a religion (Catholic or another Christian denomination) tended to be more unfavorable to induced abortion and were less likely to feel that legalizing abortion would decrease the health problems caused by unsafe abortion. There were no significant differences according to age or course major. A troublesome finding was the young people's limited interest in the issue of legalizing abortion.

Indigenous (Māori) perspectives on abortion in New Zealand

Abortion is an under-researched, sensitive and politicised topic, but in the New Zealand context, there is a conspicuous dearth of exploratory research on Indigenous (Māori) perspectives on abortion, despite some indication that Māori seek abortion services. International research that attends to the socio-cultural context of abortion evidences a fascinating variability of perspectives and attitudes about abortion, with some commonalities and patterns of resistance. Within accounts of Māori historical practice of abortion, there is some evidence of variability, and we sought to better understand the contemporary socio-cultural context surrounding Māori perspectives on abortion. As part of an Indigenous feminist (Mana Wāhine) interview study with 43 participants (26 women, 17 men), thematic analysis of participants’ talk about abortion identified notions regarding “protection of a new life”, “woman’s individual choice”, and “extended family investment and support” as foregrounded themes. We describe a rich and nuanced account of Māori perspectives on abortion, describing how these are structurally embedded within particular socio-historical and socio-cultural contexts, including Māori ideologies and theories, colonisation and Christianity, and women’s rights activism.

Meanings of abortion in context: accounts of abortion in the lives of women diagnosed with breast cancer

BACKGROUND

A breast cancer diagnosis and an abortion can each be pivotal moments in a woman's life. Research on abortion and breast cancer deals predominantly with women diagnosed during pregnancy who might be advised to have an abortion. The other-discredited but persistent-association is that abortions cause breast cancer. The aim here was to understand some of the ways in which women themselves might experience the convergence of abortion and breast cancer.

METHODS

Among 50 women recruited from the Australian Breast Cancer Family Study and interviewed in depth about what it meant to have a breast cancer diagnosis before the age of 41, five spontaneously told of having or contemplating an abortion. The transcripts of these five women were analysed to identify what abortion meant in the context of breast cancer, studying each woman's account as an individual "case" and interpreting it within narrative theory.

RESULTS

It was evident that each woman understood abortion as playing a different role in her life. One reported an abortion that she did not link to her cancer, the second was relieved not to have to abort a mid-treatment pregnancy, the third represented abortion as saving her life by making her cancer identifiable, the fourth grieved an abortion that had enabled her to begin chemotherapy, and the fifth believed that her cancer was caused by an earlier abortion.

CONCLUSIONS

The women's accounts illustrate the different meanings of abortion in women's lives, with concomitant need for diverse support, advice, and information.