多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织裁决之前,美国各地对堕胎机会的看法:全国调查结果。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-20 DOI:10.1363/psrh.12238
Brandon L Crawford, Megan K Simmons, Ronna C Turner, Wen-Juo Lo, Kristen N Jozkowski
{"title":"多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织裁决之前,美国各地对堕胎机会的看法:全国调查结果。","authors":"Brandon L Crawford,&nbsp;Megan K Simmons,&nbsp;Ronna C Turner,&nbsp;Wen-Juo Lo,&nbsp;Kristen N Jozkowski","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perceptions of abortion access across the United States prior to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision: Results from a national survey.\",\"authors\":\"Brandon L Crawford,&nbsp;Megan K Simmons,&nbsp;Ronna C Turner,&nbsp;Wen-Juo Lo,&nbsp;Kristen N Jozkowski\",\"doi\":\"10.1363/psrh.12238\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12238\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12238","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:堕胎在美国很常见,尽管对一些人来说越来越困难。除了禁止大多数堕胎、限制提供者数量和增加成本的限制性政策外,获得堕胎的障碍还包括支持性较差的文化氛围和与堕胎有关的污名。在美国最高法院对多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康案作出裁决之前,研究表明,人们普遍认为堕胎很容易,但这项研究没有考察推动这些看法的根本因素。方法:2019年,我们使用封闭式和开放式调查问题的数据,调查了人们对所在州堕胎机会的评估差异,以及影响这些看法的因素。我们招募了讲英语和西班牙语的美国成年人(N = 2599)来自Qualtrics的国家小组,使用基于配额的抽样参与了一项基于网络的调查。我们使用多项逻辑回归来检验跨人口特征的访问感知的预测因素,并使用主题分析来分析开放式回答。结果:53%的参与者认为在他们的州堕胎很容易。讲西班牙语的人和来自立法“敌对”国家的参与者更有可能认为访问很困难。与合法性相关的知识和反堕胎身份与认为堕胎很容易有关。结论:在多布斯之前,参与者对堕胎的容易或困难的解释是主观的。对州堕胎法和堕胎服务提供者普遍存在误解,这表明需要对堕胎法、政策和堕胎机会进行更多的教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.40%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health provides the latest peer-reviewed, policy-relevant research and analysis on sexual and reproductive health and rights in the United States and other developed countries. For more than four decades, Perspectives has offered unique insights into how reproductive health issues relate to one another; how they are affected by policies and programs; and their implications for individuals and societies. Published four times a year, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health includes original research, special reports and commentaries on the latest developments in the field of sexual and reproductive health, as well as staff-written summaries of recent findings in the field.
期刊最新文献
Understanding abortion legality and trimester of abortion care in Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky, three abortion‐restrictive states Exploring adolescent-facing US clinicians' perceptions of their contraceptive counseling and use of shared decision-making: A qualitative study. "It shouldn't be just hush-hush": A qualitative community-based study of menstrual health communication among women in Philadelphia. Amicus brief of over 300 reproductive health researchers supports mifepristone's safety and effectiveness. Brief of over 300 reproductive health researchers as Amici Curiae in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1