The Presence and Consequences of Abortion Aversion in Scientific Research Related to Alcohol Use during Pregnancy

Alcohol consumption during pregnancy by women from southern Brazil: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Some maternal characteristics are related to alcohol intake during pregnancy, which irreversibly compromises the maternal-fetal binomial integrity.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the frequency, impact, and factors associated with alcohol consumption during pregnancy.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A cross-sectional study was performed at the Hospital Materno Infantil Presidente Vargas (HMIPV) in Porto Alegre/RS between March and December 2016.

METHODS

A structured questionnaire was administered along with a medical records review. They refer to the maternal sociodemographic and gestational status, alcohol consumption patterns, and characteristics of the fetus/newborn. In the statistical analysis, P values < 0.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

The frequency of alcohol intake was 37.3%; this was characterized by the consumption of fermented beverages (89.3%), especially during the first trimester (79.6%). Risky consumption (high and/or early) occurred for 30.2% of participants. Risk factors associated with maternal alcohol consumption during pregnancy were tobacco use (P < 0.001) and abortion attempt (P = 0.023). Living with a partner (P = 0.002) and planning pregnancy (P = 0.009) were protective factors. Risky consumption was related to all of the aforementioned variables as well as threatened abortion (P = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

Alcohol intake during pregnancy is common and affects nearly one-third of pregnant women. Knowledge of the population at risk and protective factors is essential for the development of campaigns that seek to reduce consumption and, therefore, its consequences for the mother and fetus.

Disseminating Evidence on Abortion Facilities to Health Departments: A Randomized Study of E-mail Strategies

Given the politicization of abortion, professionals working in U.S. health departments (HDs) may not be receptive to communications about abortion, despite often regulating abortion facilities. This paper reports results of a randomized, prospective, observational study to test the effects of e-mail language when disseminating evidence on abortion to HD professionals. Our sample was 302 HD employees who oversee healthcare facilities inspection/regulation in all 50 U.S. state HDs, clustered by HD and randomized into two study groups. In November-December 2019, we sent biweekly e-mails containing links to a website summarizing evidence on abortion facility regulation. E-mails/headers sent to one group emphasized public health values and did not include the word abortion; e-mails/headers to the other group used the word abortion. Primary outcome measures were e-mail open rates and click-through rates. Among 221 participants to whom e-mails were deliverable, the overall open rate was 36%. Open rate was 25% for PH values and 46% for abortion groups (p < .05). Effects were moderated by state abortion policy environment: in both supportive and restrictive environments, participants in the abortion messaging group were statistically more likely to open e-mails than those in the PH values group. There was no difference between groups in states with middle-ground abortion policy environments. Among participants opening at least one e-mail, 19% clicked through to the website, with no significant difference by group. This study demonstrates that repeated targeted e-mail campaigns can reach HD professionals with research summaries. Concerns that communications to HDs should avoid the word abortion are unsupported.

"We have to respect that option": The abortion aversion complex in safety-net healthcare organizations

In July 2019, the Trump administration began implementing its domestic gag rule to ban discussion of abortion in pregnancy options counseling and ensure physical separation of contraceptive and abortion services at clinical sites funded by the federal government's Title X Family Planning program. In this paper, we examine how organizational policy utilization correlated with organization-level protocols for discussing abortion in options counseling interactions while the domestic gag rule policy was under legal contest. From April 2018 to July 2019, we conducted in-depth interviews with 50 administrators in charge of setting clinical protocols regarding options counseling after a positive pregnancy test at 20 Title X-covered and 14 non-Title X-covered safety-net healthcare organizations in Ohio. We found that organizational characteristics and Title X policy utilization did not explain the heterogeneity in approaches to abortion referral that administrators reported. Administrators from 2 of 20 organizations covered by Title X policy requirements pre-emptively restricted discussion of abortion in their facilities in advance of policy enactment. Meanwhile, administrators from 10 of 14 non-Title X-covered organizations did not restrict discussion of abortion. Our analysis demonstrates how safety-net healthcare organizations' response to federal policy is shaped by administrators' institutional entrepreneurship within the abortion aversion complex: a pattern of policy miscomprehension and endorsed abortion stigma that facilitates the structural stigmatization of abortion within safety-net healthcare organizations. We conclude that current efforts to reverse the domestic gag rule will fail unless local abortion aversion complexes are targeted with intervention.

Abortion and the Mission of MCH: Perspectives of MCH and Family Planning Professionals in Health Departments

INTRODUCTION

Prior research shows that maternal and child health (MCH) and family planning (FP) divisions in health departments (HDs) engage in some abortion-related activities, largely when legally mandated; some agencies also initiate abortion-related activities. Yet little is known about health department MCH/FP professionals' views on how abortion-related work aligns with their professional mission.

METHODS

Between November 2017 and June 2018, we conducted in-depth interviews with 29 MCH/FP professionals working in 22 state and local HDs across the U.S. We conducted inductive thematic analysis to identify themes regarding participants' professional mission and values in relation to abortion-related work.

RESULTS

Participants described a strong sense of professional mission. Two contrasting perspectives on abortion and the MCH/FP mission emerged: some participants saw abortion as clearly outside the scope of their mission, even a threat to it, while others saw abortion as solidly within their mission. In states with supportive or restrictive abortion policy environments, professionals' views on abortion and professional mission generally aligned with their overall state policy environment; in states with middle-ground abortion policy environments, a range of perspectives on abortion and professional mission were expressed. Participants who saw abortion as within their mission anchored their work in core public health values such as evidence-based practice, social justice, and ensuring access to health care.

DISCUSSION

There appears to be a lack of consensus about whether and how abortion fits into the mission of MCH/FP. More work is needed to articulate whether and how abortion aligns with the MCH/FP mission.

Dismantling the legacy of failed policy approaches to pregnant people's use of alcohol and drugs

Most U.S. states have one or more pregnancy-specific alcohol or drug policies. However, research evidence indicates that some of these policies lead to increases in adverse birth outcomes, including low-birthweight and preterm birth. We offer explanations for why these ineffective policies related to pregnant people's use of alcohol and drugs in the U.S. exist, including: abortion politics; racism and the 'War on Drugs'; the design and application of scientific evidence; and lack of a pro-active vision. We propose alternative processes and concepts to guide strategies for developing new policy approaches that will support the health and well-being of pregnant people who use alcohol and drugs and their children. Processes include: involving people most affected by pregnancy-specific alcohol and drug policies in developing alternative policy and practice approaches as well as future research initiatives. Additionally, we propose that research funding support the development of policies and practices that bolster health and well-being rather than primarily documenting the harms of different substances. Concepts include accepting that policies adopted in response to pregnant people's use of alcohol and drugs cause harms and working to do better, as well as connecting to efforts that re-envision the child welfare system in the U.S.

Missing in Action: Sex and Gender in Substance Use Research

Substance use and misuse is a significant global health issue that requires a sex- and gender-based analysis. Substance use patterns and trends are gendered: that is, women and men, girls and boys, and gender-diverse people often exhibit different rates of use of substances, reasons for use, modes of administration, and effects of use. Sex-specific effects and responses to substances are also important, with various substances affecting females and males differentially. Nevertheless, much research and practice in responding to substance use and misuse remains gender blind, ignoring the impacts of sex and gender on this important health issue. This special issue identifies how various aspects of sex and gender matter in substance use, illustrates the application of sex- and gender-based analyses to a range of substances, populations and settings, and assists in progressing sex and gender science in relation to substance use.