在哥伦比亚正规医疗系统之外使用米索前列醇堕胎的动机:对波哥大和咖啡轴地区寻求堕胎后护理的妇女进行的定性研究。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Reproductive Health Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1186/s12978-024-01814-0
Juliette Ortiz, Nakeisha Blades, Elena Prada
{"title":"在哥伦比亚正规医疗系统之外使用米索前列醇堕胎的动机:对波哥大和咖啡轴地区寻求堕胎后护理的妇女进行的定性研究。","authors":"Juliette Ortiz, Nakeisha Blades, Elena Prada","doi":"10.1186/s12978-024-01814-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2006, a Constitutional Court ruling partially decriminalized abortion in Colombia, allowing the procedure in cases of rape, risk to the health or life of the woman, and fetal malformations incompatible with life. Despite this less prohibitive law, some women and pregnant people preferred self-managing their abortions outside the formal healthcare system, often without accurate information. In 2018, we undertook a study to understand what motivated women to self-manage using medications that they acquired informally. Colombia has since adopted a progressive law in 2022, permitting abortion on request through the 24th week of pregnancy. However, the implementation of this law is still underway. Examining the reasons why women chose to informally self-manage an abortion after 2006 may not only highlight how barriers to legal services persisted at that time, but also could inform strategies to increase knowledge of the current abortion law and improve access to services going forward.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In-depth interviews were conducted in 2018 with 47 women aged 18 and older who used misoprostol obtained outside of health facilities to induce an abortion, and who were receiving postabortion care in two private clinics. Interviews explored what women knew about the 2006 abortion law which was then in effect, and the reasons why they preferred informal channels for abortion care over formal healthcare services.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Women's motivations to use misoprostol obtained outside the formal healthcare system were influenced by lack of trust in the healthcare system along with incomplete and inaccurate knowledge of the abortion law. Conversely, women considered misoprostol obtained outside the healthcare system to be effective, affordable, and easier to access.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Obtaining misoprostol outside the formal healthcare system offered a more accessible and appealing prospect for some women given fears of legal repercussion and stigma toward abortion. Though this preference will likely continue despite the more liberal abortion law, strategies should be implemented to broaden knowledge of the recent change in law and to combat misinformation and stigma. This would support knowledge of and access to legal abortion for those who wish to avail themselves of these services.</p>","PeriodicalId":20899,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11143633/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Motivations for using misoprostol for abortion outside the formal healthcare system in Colombia: a qualitative study of women seeking postabortion care in Bogotá and the Coffee Axis.\",\"authors\":\"Juliette Ortiz, Nakeisha Blades, Elena Prada\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12978-024-01814-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2006, a Constitutional Court ruling partially decriminalized abortion in Colombia, allowing the procedure in cases of rape, risk to the health or life of the woman, and fetal malformations incompatible with life. Despite this less prohibitive law, some women and pregnant people preferred self-managing their abortions outside the formal healthcare system, often without accurate information. In 2018, we undertook a study to understand what motivated women to self-manage using medications that they acquired informally. Colombia has since adopted a progressive law in 2022, permitting abortion on request through the 24th week of pregnancy. However, the implementation of this law is still underway. Examining the reasons why women chose to informally self-manage an abortion after 2006 may not only highlight how barriers to legal services persisted at that time, but also could inform strategies to increase knowledge of the current abortion law and improve access to services going forward.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In-depth interviews were conducted in 2018 with 47 women aged 18 and older who used misoprostol obtained outside of health facilities to induce an abortion, and who were receiving postabortion care in two private clinics. Interviews explored what women knew about the 2006 abortion law which was then in effect, and the reasons why they preferred informal channels for abortion care over formal healthcare services.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Women's motivations to use misoprostol obtained outside the formal healthcare system were influenced by lack of trust in the healthcare system along with incomplete and inaccurate knowledge of the abortion law. Conversely, women considered misoprostol obtained outside the healthcare system to be effective, affordable, and easier to access.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Obtaining misoprostol outside the formal healthcare system offered a more accessible and appealing prospect for some women given fears of legal repercussion and stigma toward abortion. Though this preference will likely continue despite the more liberal abortion law, strategies should be implemented to broaden knowledge of the recent change in law and to combat misinformation and stigma. This would support knowledge of and access to legal abortion for those who wish to avail themselves of these services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20899,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reproductive Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11143633/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reproductive Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-024-01814-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-024-01814-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:2006 年,哥伦比亚宪法法院的一项裁决使堕胎部分合法化,允许在强奸、危及妇女健康或生命以及胎儿畸形等情况下进行堕胎。尽管法律的禁止性有所降低,但一些妇女和孕妇仍倾向于在正规医疗系统之外自行处理堕胎事宜,而且往往缺乏准确的信息。2018 年,我们开展了一项研究,以了解促使妇女使用非正规途径获得的药物进行自我管理的原因。此后,哥伦比亚于 2022 年通过了一项渐进式法律,允许在怀孕 24 周前根据请求进行堕胎。然而,这项法律的实施仍在进行中。研究妇女在 2006 年之后选择通过非正式途径自行堕胎的原因,不仅可以凸显当时法律服务的障碍是如何持续存在的,还可以为今后增加对现行堕胎法的了解和改善服务获取渠道的策略提供参考:2018 年,我们对 47 名年龄在 18 岁及以上的妇女进行了深入访谈,这些妇女使用了在医疗机构外获得的米索前列醇进行人工流产,并在两家私人诊所接受流产后护理。访谈探讨了妇女对当时生效的 2006 年堕胎法的了解,以及她们更愿意通过非正规渠道接受堕胎护理而不是正规医疗服务的原因:结果:妇女使用正规医疗系统以外的米索前列醇的动机受到对医疗系统缺乏信任以及对堕胎法了解不全面和不准确的影响。相反,妇女认为在医疗系统外获得的米索前列醇有效、负担得起且更容易获得:结论:由于担心法律后果和对堕胎的污名化,在正规医疗系统外获得米索前列醇对一些妇女来说更容易获得,也更有吸引力。尽管堕胎法更加宽松,但这种偏好可能会继续存在,因此应采取策略,扩大对近期法律变化的了解,消除误导和污名化。这将有助于那些希望获得合法堕胎服务的人了解和获得这些服务。
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
Motivations for using misoprostol for abortion outside the formal healthcare system in Colombia: a qualitative study of women seeking postabortion care in Bogotá and the Coffee Axis.

Background: In 2006, a Constitutional Court ruling partially decriminalized abortion in Colombia, allowing the procedure in cases of rape, risk to the health or life of the woman, and fetal malformations incompatible with life. Despite this less prohibitive law, some women and pregnant people preferred self-managing their abortions outside the formal healthcare system, often without accurate information. In 2018, we undertook a study to understand what motivated women to self-manage using medications that they acquired informally. Colombia has since adopted a progressive law in 2022, permitting abortion on request through the 24th week of pregnancy. However, the implementation of this law is still underway. Examining the reasons why women chose to informally self-manage an abortion after 2006 may not only highlight how barriers to legal services persisted at that time, but also could inform strategies to increase knowledge of the current abortion law and improve access to services going forward.

Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted in 2018 with 47 women aged 18 and older who used misoprostol obtained outside of health facilities to induce an abortion, and who were receiving postabortion care in two private clinics. Interviews explored what women knew about the 2006 abortion law which was then in effect, and the reasons why they preferred informal channels for abortion care over formal healthcare services.

Results: Women's motivations to use misoprostol obtained outside the formal healthcare system were influenced by lack of trust in the healthcare system along with incomplete and inaccurate knowledge of the abortion law. Conversely, women considered misoprostol obtained outside the healthcare system to be effective, affordable, and easier to access.

Conclusions: Obtaining misoprostol outside the formal healthcare system offered a more accessible and appealing prospect for some women given fears of legal repercussion and stigma toward abortion. Though this preference will likely continue despite the more liberal abortion law, strategies should be implemented to broaden knowledge of the recent change in law and to combat misinformation and stigma. This would support knowledge of and access to legal abortion for those who wish to avail themselves of these services.

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
Reproductive Health
Reproductive Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
220
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Reproductive Health focuses on all aspects of human reproduction. The journal includes sections dedicated to adolescent health, female fertility and midwifery and all content is open access. Reproductive health is defined as a state of physical, mental, and social well-being in all matters relating to the reproductive system, at all stages of life. Good reproductive health implies that people are able to have a satisfying and safe sex life, the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when, and how often to do so. Men and women should be informed about and have access to safe, effective, affordable, and acceptable methods of family planning of their choice, and the right to appropriate health-care services that enable women to safely go through pregnancy and childbirth.
期刊最新文献
Burden of uterine cancer in China from 1990 to 2021 and 15-year projection: a systematic analysis and comparison with global levels. "I managed to stand on my own. I saved my baby's life.": qualitative analysis of birth experiences from women living with HIV in Cape Town, South Africa. Assessment of the impact an educational intervention on post-traumatic stress disorder and social cognitive theory constructs in women with sexual assault experience: a study protocol for a clinical trial. The reasons for and influences of unintended teenage pregnancy in Kericho county, Kenya: a qualitative study. Men's involvement in family planning programs: an exploratory study from Karachi, Pakistan.
×
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