Equitable Care for Pregnant Incarcerated Women: Infant Contact After Birth-A Human Right

Building an implementation framework to address unmet contraceptive care needs in a carceral setting: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The provision of contraceptive care for incarcerated individuals has been largely inconsistent and has contributed to, at best, inadequate care, and at worst reproductive abuses, violence, and coercion. While previous research has identified strategies to remedy known issues, to date, very few recommendations have been implemented across the carceral system. To address this, we conducted a systematic review of policy and practice recommendations to improve contraceptive care to reproductive-aged, incarcerated individuals in the United States.

METHODS

We conducted this systematic review utilizing the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and framed it within the National Implementation Research Network's (NIRN) Exploration stage. We searched PubMed, PSYCInfo, SCOPUS, ProQuest, Web of Science, MedLine, Social Science Citation Index and reference sections of included materials. Basic study information, explicitly stated policy and practice recommendations, and discussions and conclusions that subtly provide recommendations were extracted in full text. We utilized a thematic analysis approach to analyze the extracted text.

RESULTS

A total of 45 materials met the inclusion criteria. Seven overarching themes were identified: 1) policy changes needed to implement care; 2) need for contraceptive care in carceral systems; 3) justice agency barriers regarding contraceptive care provision; 4) policy barriers to contraceptive access; 5) funding strategies to improve care; 6) patient preferences for contraceptive care delivery; and 7) healthcare provider knowledge regarding contraceptive care. The seven themes identified shed light on the need for, gaps, barriers, and facilitators of current contraceptive care provision to incarcerated individuals.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review accomplished two goals of NIRN's Exploration stage. First, the compiled evidence identified a clear need for change regarding policies and practices pertaining to contraceptive care provision to incarcerated individuals in the United States. Second, our findings identified several evidence-based solutions supported both by research and professional healthcare organizations to address the identified need for change. This study provides an initial blueprint for correctional agencies to implement the necessary changes for improving contraceptive care provision to incarcerated populations. The correctional system is in a unique position to deliver much-needed care, which would result in many potential benefits to the individuals, correctional system, and community at large.

Health care and social justice implications of incarceration for pregnant people who use drugs

The experiences of and care for pregnant, incarcerated people with substance use disorders represent a convergence of numerous clinical, historical, racialized, legal, and gendered factors. Understanding how these forces shape how they became enmeshed in the criminal legal system as well as the context of the care they do or do not receive while in custody is essential for promoting equitable maternal health care. In this review, we describe the prevalence of SUD among pregnant people behind bars, the health care landscape of incarceration, access to treatment for opioid use disorder for incarcerated pregnant and postpartum people, and nuances of providing such treatment in an inherently coercive setting. Throughout, we highlight the ways that the child welfare system and mass incarceration in the U.S. have had a unique and discriminatory impact on pregnant and parenting people, and have done so in distinctly racialized ways. Situating the clinical care of incarcerated pregnant people who use drugs in this context sheds light on fundamental social justice and health care intersections.

Breastfeeding in Incarcerated Settings in the United States: A National Survey of Frequency and Policies

Objectives: To assess the existence of prison and jail policies and practices that allow incarcerated women to breastfeed while in custody, and prevalence of women in custody who pumped human milk for their infants. Methods: We surveyed 22 state prison systems and 6 county jails from 2016 to 2017 about policies related to breastfeeding and other programs for pregnant and parenting women in custody. In addition, 11 prisons and 5 jails reported 6 months of monthly, prospective data on the number of women pumping human milk, as well as information on placement of infants born to women in custody. Results: Eleven prisons and five jails had policies that supported the practice of expressed milk, either through pumping or breastfeeding. Over 6 months at these sites that allowed lactation, there were 207 women who gave birth in the prisons and an average of 8 women/month who pumped human milk; at the jails, there were 67 women who gave birth and an average of 6 women/month who pumped human milk. Most infants born to women in custody were placed in the care of a family member. Conclusions: Breastfeeding and the provision of human milk are critical public health issues. Our data show inconsistent implementation of policies and practices supportive of breastfeeding in prisons and jails. However, there are institutions in the United States that are supportive of incarcerated women's breastfeeding and lactation needs. Further research is needed to identify the barriers and facilitators associated with implementing supportive breastfeeding policies and practices in the carceral system.

Female permanent contraception policies and occurrence at a sample of U.S. prisons and jails

OBJECTIVE(S)

Incarcerated individuals have an unmet need for contraception, yet have also been subject to coercive permanent contraception practices. Data do not exist on prison and jail policies around access to permanent contraception or how often it occurs among women in custody. We sought to describe permanent and reversible contraception policies at U.S carceral institutions and the frequency of these procedures.

STUDY DESIGN

We surveyed a convenience sample of 22 state prison systems and 6 county jails from 2016 to 2017 about female permanent contraception and reversible contraception policies. In addition, 10 prisons and 4 jails reported 6 months of monthly data on the number of postpartum permanent contraception procedures performed on women who gave birth in custody. We analyzed results for descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Eleven prisons (50%) and 5 jails (83%) permitted female permanent contraception; 7 of these prisons and 3 of these jails allowing permanent contraception did not have a written policy about it. Six prisons and no jails provided access to permanent but not reversible contraception. Over 6 months, 3 women from 2 prisons and 4 women at 2 jails received postpartum permanent contraception.

CONCLUSION(S)

The majority of prisons and jails in our study allowed incarcerated women to have permanent contraception in custody, often without formalized policies in place. Postpartum permanent contraception occurred during the study period. Given the inherent lack of autonomy of incarceration and history of sterilization abuses in this marginalized group, policy-makers should advance policies that avoid coercive permanent contraception and increase access to reversible contraception in carceral settings.

IMPLICATIONS

Many carceral institutions permit women to undergo permanent contraception but provide no access to reversible contraception; this practice raises concern for compromised autonomy and further reproductive marginalization of a group with limited access to quality reproductive health care.

Abortion Access for Incarcerated People: Incidence of Abortion and Policies at U.S. Prisons and Jails

OBJECTIVE

To understand abortion incidence among incarcerated people and the relation to prison and jail pregnancy policies.

METHODS

We collected abortion numbers and policy data from convenience sample of 22 state prison systems, all Federal Bureau of Prisons sites, and six county jails that voluntarily reported monthly, aggregate pregnancy outcomes for 12 months in 2016-2017. Sites also completed a baseline survey of institution characteristics and pregnancy policies, including abortion. We reported facility policies and abortion incidence according to state-level abortion characteristics.

RESULTS

Only half of state prisons in the study allowed abortion in both the first and second trimesters, and 14% did not allow abortion at all. Of the 19 state prisons permitting abortion, two thirds required the incarcerated woman to pay. Four jails of the six study jails (67%) allowed abortions in the first and second trimesters, and 25% of those required the incarcerated woman to pay for the procedure. The three prisons and two jails that did not allow abortions were in states considered hostile to abortion access. In the state and federal prisons studied, 11 of the 816 pregnancies (1.3%) that ended during the study time period were abortions. Of the 224 pregnancies that ended at study jails, 33 were abortions (15%), with more than half of those (55%) occurring in the first trimester. The abortion ratio (proportion of pregnancies ending in abortion) was 1.4% for prisons and 18% for jails.

CONCLUSION

Although some incarcerated individuals have abortions, many prisons and jails have restrictive policies surrounding abortion, either through self-payment requirements or explicit prohibition. Findings from this study should prompt further inquiry into abortion incidence in these settings and address interventions to ensure incarcerated people, in accordance with legal requirements and health equity, have access to abortion.