Abortion attempts without clinical supervision among transgender, nonbinary and gender-expansive people in the United States

Pregnancy experiences of transgender and gender-expansive individuals: A systematic scoping review from a critical midwifery perspective

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that transgender and gender-expansive people are more likely to have suboptimal pregnancy outcomes compared with cisgender people. The aim of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of the role of midwifery in these inequities by analyzing the pregnancy experiences of transgender and gender-expansive people from a critical midwifery perspective.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic scoping review. We included 15 papers published since 2010 that reported on pregnancy experiences of people who had experienced gestational pregnancy at least once, and were transgender, nonbinary, or had other gender-expansive identities.

RESULTS

Three themes emerged from our analysis: "Navigating identity during pregnancy," "Experiences with mental health and wellbeing," and "Encounters in the maternal and newborn care system." Although across studies respondents reported positive experiences, both within healthcare and social settings, access to gender-affirmative (midwifery) care and daily social realities were often shaped by trans-negativity and transphobia.

DISCUSSION

To improve care outcomes of transgender and gender-expansive people, it is necessary to counter anti-trans ideologies by "fixing the knowledge" of midwifery curricula. This requires challenging dominant cultural norms and images around pregnancy, reconsidering the way in which the relationship among "sex," "gender," and "pregnancy" is understood and given meaning to in midwifery, and applying an intersectional lens to investigate the relationship between gender inequality and reproductive inequity of people with multiple, intersecting marginalized identities who may experience the accumulated impacts of racism, ageism, and classism. Future research should identify pedagogical frameworks that are suitable for guiding implementation efforts.

Supported at-home abortion: An exploratory study of methods, outcomes, and motivations of community-led abortion care in the United States and Canada

OBJECTIVES

This an exploratory study aimed to describe methods and outcomes of comprehensive community-led abortion care in the United States and Canada.

STUDY DESIGN

This community-based participatory research study recruited community abortion providers from the United States and Canada through existing confidential networks. They participated through in-person and online collaboration to design and implement a data collection tool for abortion methods, outcomes, and motivations from clients. We implemented significant security measures to protect participant confidentiality.

RESULTS

Thirty community providers were recruited, five withdrew, and 12 provided data for 167 at-home abortions. Most abortions occurred between 6 and 10 weeks (104 [62%]). Abortions between 13 and 21 weeks represent 39 cases (23%). Misoprostol only was the most common method (n = 125 [75%]), followed by herbs alone (n = 12 [7%]) and aspiration (n = 12 [7%]). Complications were rare (n = 3 [1.8%]), with 163 complete abortions (98%). The primary motivation for seeking community-led abortion care was avoiding a clinic.

CONCLUSIONS

Community providers employed various abortion methods with safety and effectiveness profiles comparable to those reported for clinical and community-based abortion care. Clients wanting a different model of abortion care seek out community-led abortions, regardless of whether clinics are legal and accessible.

IMPLICATIONS

Community-led abortion is a viable choice for patients. Community providers should be recognized for their contributions to abortion access and high-quality, person-centered care. This study demonstrates a broader range of abortion providers and diverse options meeting the need for individualized abortion care.

Sampling strategies among studies of barriers to abortion in the United States: A scoping review of abortion access research

OBJECTIVES

Understanding barriers to abortion care is particularly important post-Dobbs. However, many abortion access studies recruit from abortion-providing facilities, which overlook individuals who do not present for clinic-based care. To our knowledge, no studies have reviewed research recruitment strategies in the literature or considered how they might affect our knowledge of abortion barriers. We aimed to identify populations included and sampling methods used in studies of abortion barriers in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN

We used a scoping review protocol to search five databases for articles examining US-based individuals' experiences accessing abortion. We included English-language articles published between January 2011 and February 2022. For included studies, we identified the sampling strategy and population recruited.

RESULTS

Our search produced 2763 articles, of which 71 met inclusion criteria. Half of the included papers recruited participants at abortion-providing facilities (n = 35), while the remainder recruited from online sources (n = 14), other health clinics (n = 10), professional organizations (n = 8), abortion funds (n = 2), community organizations (n = 2), key informants (n = 2), and an abortion storytelling project (n = 1). Most articles (n = 61) reported information from people discussing their own abortions; the rest asked nonabortion seekers (e.g., physicians, genetic counselors, attorneys) about barriers to care.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies of abortion barriers enroll participants from a range of venues, but the majority recruit people who obtained abortions, and half recruit from abortion clinics.

IMPLICATIONS

As abortion access becomes constrained and criminalized in the post-Roe context, our findings indicate how investigators might recruit study participants from a variety of settings to fully understand the abortion seeking experience.

Family building and pregnancy experiences of cisgender sexual minority women

BACKGROUND

Although 10% to 20% of cisgender women aged 18 to 40 years have a sexual minority identity (eg, bisexual, lesbian, and queer), there is limited research on the family building and pregnancy experiences of sexual minority cisgender women. Improving our understanding of the family building and pregnancy experiences of cisgender sexual minority women is critical for improving the perinatal health of this population.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the mode of family building, past pregnancy experiences, and future pregnancy intentions among cisgender sexual minority women by sexual orientation.

STUDY DESIGN

This is an observational study which was conducted using cross-sectional data collected in 2019 from a national sample of 1369 cisgender sexual minority women aged 18 to 45 years.

RESULTS

Most participants (n=794, 58%) endorsed multiple sexual orientations, most commonly queer (n=641, 47%), lesbian (n=640, 47%), and/or bisexual (n=583, 43%). There were 243 (18%) cisgender sexual minority women who were parents. Pregnancy was used by 74% (181/243) of women to build their families. Among participants who used pregnancy, 60% (108/181) became pregnant through sexual activity with another parent of the child, whereas 27% (64/243) of women used donor sperm. An additional 10% (n=24) became parents through second-parent adoption, 10% (n=25) through adoption, and 14% (n=35) through step-parenting. Bisexual women more often used sexual activity to become parents (61/100, 61%) compared with queer (40/89, 45%) and lesbian women (40/130, 31%). In contrast, lesbian (50/130, 39%) and queer (25/89, 27%) women more often used donor sperm to become parents compared with bisexual women (11/100, 11%). Among the 266 (19%) cisgender sexual minority women who had ever been pregnant, there were 545 pregnancies (mean, 2.05 pregnancies per woman). Among those pregnancies, 59% (n=327) resulted in live birth, 23% (n=126) resulted in miscarriage, 15% (n=83) resulted in abortion, and 2% (n=9) resulted in ectopic pregnancy. A quarter of women had future pregnancy intentions, with no differences by sexual orientation. Overall, few participants (16%) reported that all of their healthcare providers were aware of their sexual orientation.

CONCLUSION

Cisgender sexual minority women primarily built their families through pregnancy and a quarter have future pregnancy desires. In addition, there were important differences in family building methods used by sexual orientation. Providers should be aware of the pregnancy and family-building patterns, plans, and needs of cisgender sexual minority women.

Reproductive Justice as a Framework for Abortion Care

This article presents an in-depth analysis of abortion access and rights within the Reproductive Justice framework, underscoring the health, social, and economic consequences of limited access. It emphasizes the critical role of abortion as essential, safe health care and highlights the complexities surrounding abortion decisions and the barriers faced by poor and historically marginalized populations. Amid the escalating access restrictions, the article concludes with a call to action for obstetricians and gynecologists and our allied health care providers to recognize, support, and advocate for safe, legal, and affordable abortion services as fundamental to health care equity and human rights.

Self-Managed Abortion in the United States

Purpose of Review

This review aims to provide up-to-date information about self-managed abortion in the USA.

Recent Findings

Evidence indicates that there is growing demand for self-managed abortion in the USA as obstacles to facility-based care increase, especially since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Self-managed abortion with medications is safe and effective.

Summary

Based on a nationally representative survey, the lifetime prevalence of self-managed abortion in the USA in 2017 was estimated to be 7%. People experiencing barriers to abortion care, including people of color, people with lower incomes, people in states that have restrictive abortion laws, and those living farther from facilities providing abortion care are more likely to attempt self-managed abortion. While people may use a range of methods to self-manage abortion, there is growing use of safe and effective medications, including mifepristone used together with misoprostol and misoprostol used alone; use of traumatic and dangerous methods is rare. While many people attempt to self-manage their abortion because of barriers to facility-based care, others have a preference for self-care because it is convenient, accessible, and private. While the medical risks of self-managed abortion may be few, the legal risks may be significant. Sixty-one people have been criminally investigated or arrested between 2000 and 2020 for allegedly self-managing their abortion or helping someone else do so. Clinicians play an important role in providing evidence-based information and care to patients considering or attempting self-managed abortion, as well as minimizing legal risks.

Birth includes us: Development of a community-led survey to capture experiences of pregnancy care among LGBTQ2S+ families

BACKGROUND

Limited research captures the intersectional and nuanced experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, two-spirit, and other sexual and gender-minoritized (LGBTQ2S+) people when accessing perinatal care services, including care for pregnancy, birth, abortion, and/or pregnancy loss.

METHODS

We describe the participatory research methods used to develop the Birth Includes Us survey, an online survey study to capture experiences of respectful perinatal care for LGBTQ2S+ individuals. From 2019 to 2021, our research team in collaboration with a multi-stakeholder Community Steering Council identified, adapted, and/or designed survey items which were reviewed and then content validated by community members with lived experience.

RESULTS

The final survey instrument spans the perinatal care experience, from preconception to early parenthood, and includes items to capture experiences of care across different pregnancy roles (eg, pregnant person, partner/co-parent, intended parent using surrogacy) and pregnancy outcomes (eg, live birth, stillbirth, miscarriage, and abortion). Three validated measures of respectful perinatal care are included, as well as measures to assess experiences of racism, discrimination, and bias across intersections of identity.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

By centering diverse perspectives in the review process, the Birth Includes Us instrument is the first survey to assess the range of experiences within LGBTQ2S+ communities. This instrument is ready for implementation in studies that seek to examine geographic and identity-based perinatal health outcomes and care experiences among LGBTQ2S+ people.

Breaking the Binary: How Clinicians Can Ensure Everyone Receives High Quality Reproductive Health Services

The gender binary has historically defined the study and practice of reproductive and sexual healthcare. However, the male and female binary categorization of sex does not adequately define patients seeking reproductive and sexual health. Comprehensive sexual healthcare should consider diverse gender identity and non-heteronormative sexual practices, family planning, sexually transmitted infections, cancer prevention, and sexual function. Recent research suggests clinicians do not feel prepared to provide care for sexual and gender minority (SGM) patients. In this narrative review, we focus on reproductive and sexual health within the scope of obstetric and gynecologic (OB/GYN) clinical practice. We used traditional medical subject headings to summarize data from publications in peer-reviewed journals published in the last 10 years and identified barriers, facilitators and best practices for de-gendering reproductive healthcare. Following a roughly chronological care path across the lifespan, we categorized findings into the following topics: Early Care for SGM, Sexual Health, Family Planning, and Care Later in Life for SGM. We include recommendations for creating a welcoming environment, SGM inclusive training for clinicians and staff, and best practices for individualized counseling. We review suggested practices related to service delivery and clinical considerations in the provision of sexual and reproductive health care for gender and sexual minority patients.

Self-managed abortion: Aligning law and policy with medical evidence

People have always and will always find ways to try to end their pregnancies when necessary. Many do so safely without the involvement or direct supervision of healthcare professionals by self-managing their abortions. In 2022, the well-established safety and efficacy of abortion medications prompted WHO to fully endorse self-managed medication abortion as part of a comprehensive range of safe, effective options for abortion care. But despite robust evidence supporting the safety and effectiveness of the self-use of medications for abortion, abortion laws and policies around the world remain at odds with clinical evidence and with the realities of self-managed medication abortion in the present day. The present article considers legal issues related to self-managed abortion and addresses the role of obstetricians, gynecologists, and other healthcare professionals in promoting clinical and legal safety in abortion care through support of self-managed abortion.

Understanding the experiences and needs of LGBTIQA+ individuals when accessing abortion care and pregnancy options counselling: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Safe, accessible, and inclusive abortion care and pregnancy options counselling are essential components of sexual and reproductive health and rights. Research has documented LGBTIQA+ people are as likely, or more than likely, as the general population to experience an abortion in their lifetime yet face significant barriers to accessing abortion and related care, which undermines well-being.

AIMS

The present study undertakes a scoping review of research on the needs and experiences of the LGBTIQA+ population (representing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, gender diverse, intersex, queer, asexual, and questioning) when accessing abortion care, pregnancy options, and post-abortion counselling to support improved understanding of pregnant people's preferences, needs, and experiences.

METHODS

The reporting of this scoping review is guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension of Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Academic databases were searched using terms relating to gender identity and sexuality, abortion, pregnancy options, and post-abortion counselling to identify peer reviewed papers published in English. Seven publications were included in the review that described experiences of LGBTIQA+ people accessing abortion-related care.

RESULTS

The included studies were predominantly conducted in the USA using quantitative and qualitative research designs. Thematic analysis highlighted participants' experiences of discrimination and exclusion in healthcare settings, healthcare avoidance, unsafe abortion, non-disclosure to providers, and poor health outcomes for LGBTIQA+ people.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender-inclusive services and training for health providers is necessary to provide safe and accessible abortion care and overcome generations of mistrust held by the LGBTIQA+ community. Research into the needs of LGBTIQA+ people when accessing pregnancy options counselling is critically needed.

Options Counseling for the Pregnant Adolescent Patient

Although teenage pregnancy rates have decreased over the past 30 years, many adolescents become pregnant every year. It is important for pediatricians to have the ability and the resources to make a timely pregnancy diagnosis in their adolescent patients and provide them with nonjudgmental counseling that includes the full range of pregnancy options. Counseling includes an unbiased discussion of the adolescent's options to continue or terminate the pregnancy, supporting the adolescent in the decision-making process, and referring the adolescent to appropriate resources and services. It is important for pediatricians to be familiar with laws and policies impacting access to abortion care, especially for minor adolescents, as well as laws that seek to limit health care professionals' provision of unbiased pregnancy options counseling and referrals, either for abortion care or continuation of pregnancy in accordance with the adolescent's choice. Pediatricians who choose not to provide such discussions should promptly refer pregnant adolescent patients to a health care professional who will offer developmentally appropriate pregnancy options counseling that includes the full range of pregnancy options. Pediatricians should be aware of and oppose policies that restrict their ability to provide pregnant adolescents with unbiased counseling that includes the full range of pregnancy options. This approach to pregnancy options counseling has not changed since the original 1989 American Academy of Pediatrics statement on this issue.

Reproductive health in transgender and gender diverse individuals: A narrative review to guide clinical care and international guidelines

Background

Hormonal treatments and surgical interventions practiced with the aim to affirm gender identity in transgender and gender diverse patients may impact their future reproductive ability, family building, and family planning options. Whereas it is recommended by international guidelines to discuss the potential risks of infertility and to present fertility preservation (FP) options to transgender individuals and their families prior to initiating any of these treatments, many barriers still remain. Further, transgender and gender diverse individuals often experience barriers to accessing contraception, abortion, pre-conception care, and comprehensive perinatal care.

Aims

In this review we summarize the current literature on reproductive healthcare issues reported in transgender people including fertility issues, fertility preservation (FP), contraception, pregnancy and lactation and perinatal health.

Methods

A narrative literature search of major databases (Pubmed, Medline, PsycInfo, Google Scholar, Web of Science) was conducted. Given the paucity and heterogeneity of studies, summative review tactics were not available. The literature was critically reviewed by international experts in the field with focus on the impact of gender-affirming medical interventions on future fertility, current FP options and reproductive health issues in transgender people.

Results

The current literature supports that transgender and gender diverse individuals may wish to have genetically related children in the future, rendering the issue of FP relevant to this patient group. The cryopreservation of mature gametes is an efficacious option for FP for post-pubertal adolescents and adults. It is recommended to discuss these options at time of planning for gender-affirming hormonal therapy (GAHT) or engaging with other gender-affirming procedures that can limit future fertility. Discontinuation of GAHT may allow individuals to undergo FP later, but data are limited and there is the concern of symptoms and consequences of stopping GAHT. For pre-pubertal and early pubertal children, FP options are limited to the cryopreservation of gonadal tissue. At present the tissue can become functional only after re-transplantation, which might be undesirable by transgender individuals in the future. Preconception counseling, prenatal surveillance, perinatal support, contraceptive, and pregnancy termination related healthcare need to be meaningfully adapted for this patient population, and many knowledge gaps remain.

Discussion

Specialized FP reproductive healthcare for transgender and gender diverse individuals is in early evolution. Research should be conducted to examine effects of medical interventions on fertility, timing of FP, gamete preservation and outcome of the fertility treatments. Strategies to inform and educate transgender and gender diverse patients can lead to optimization of reproductive care and counseling and decision making of FP for this population.

Addressing urologic health disparities in sexual and gender minority communities through patient-centered outcomes research

Sexual and gender minority (SGM) communities face stigma and discrimination that impact all aspects of health. To better understand and improve their urologic health outcomes, we must study SGM patients as a distinct population and pursue research on outcomes identified as priorities to SGM communities. Patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) is a methodology which is increasingly familiar to urologists and is crucial to adequately addressing SGM health in future urological research. We review existing literature focused on urologic outcomes of SGM populations and highlight specific PCOR initiatives built on SGM community engagement.

“It’s a walk of shame”: Experiences of unintended pregnancy and abortion among sexual- and gender-minoritized females in urban India

Background:

Unintended pregnancy and safe abortion access in India remain critical public health concerns. The health of sexual- and gender-minoritized females (SGMF; those assigned female at birth and identify as other than heterosexual and/or as other than cisgender women) in India is understudied.

Aim:

We examined experiences of unintended pregnancy and abortion among SGMF individuals in urban India.

Methods:

We used focus group discussions (n = 8 individuals in two groups) and interviews (n = 20) with SGMF individuals. Data were collected in December 2017. Transcripts were analyzed using a priori thematic analysis and then open thematic analysis in Dedoose online software.

Results:

Nine participants experienced or suspected they had unintended pregnancies. Pregnancy circumstances were mostly due to sex without using a barrier method. Participants discussed using traditional methods to induce abortion or changing their approach to contraception. Social support was often lacking, though partners were supportive of abortion choices. Participants reported stigma and surveillance from family, friends, providers, and community members.

Conclusion:

These findings highlight the effects of stigma in relation to abortion and unintended pregnancy on health and relationships.

"I'll just deal with this on my own": a qualitative exploration of experiences with self-managed abortion in the United States

Background

A 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.

Methods

In 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.

Results

Motivations 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.

Conclusions

There are many types of SMA experiences. In addition to those who pursue SMA as a last resort (after facing barriers to facility-based care) or as a first resort (because they prefer homeopathic remedies), our findings show that some individuals view SMA as a potential interim step worth trying after suspecting pregnancy and before accessing facility-based care. These people in particular would benefit from a medication abortion product available over the counter, online, or in the form of a missed-period pill.

Some people in the United States (US) attempt to end a pregnancy on their own without medical supervision. What we know about this experience comes from studies focused on people who go to clinics. In this study, we conducted 14 interviews with self-identified women ages 18–49 who recently reported attempting to end a pregnancy on their own and who were recruited outside of the clinic setting. We asked participants about their fertility histories, experiences seeking reproductive health care, and experiences ending a pregnancy without medical assistance. Those who took a pregnancy test and then chose to end the pregnancy on their own did so because it was convenient, accessible, and private. Those who did not test for pregnancy felt empowered by the ability to try something on their own before seeking facility-based care. All participants prioritized methods that were safe and available, though not always effective. After they attempted to end the pregnancy on their own, five participants accessed abortion care in facilities, one decided to continue the pregnancy, and eight were no longer pregnant. Our findings show that, in addition to people who end a pregnancy on their own as a last resort (after facing barriers to facility-based care) or as a first resort (because of preferences for homeopathic methods), a third group values having an interim step to try after suspecting pregnancy and before accessing facility-based care. These people would particularly benefit from a medication abortion product available over the counter, online, or in the form of a missed-period pill.