“我的手被绑”:堕胎限制和提供者在宗教和非宗教医疗保健系统的经验。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health Pub Date : 2020-07-01 Epub Date: 2020-06-29 DOI:10.1363/psrh.12148
Lee A Hasselbacher, Luciana E Hebert, Yuan Liu, Debra B Stulberg
{"title":"“我的手被绑”:堕胎限制和提供者在宗教和非宗教医疗保健系统的经验。","authors":"Lee A Hasselbacher,&nbsp;Luciana E Hebert,&nbsp;Yuan Liu,&nbsp;Debra B Stulberg","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Abortion is generally prohibited in Catholic hospitals, but less is known about abortion restrictions in other religiously affiliated health care facilities. As religiously affiliated health systems expand in the United States, it is important to understand how religious restrictions affect the practices of providers who treat pregnant patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From September 2016 to May 2018, in-depth interviews were conducted with 31 key informants (clinical providers, ethicists, chaplains and health system administrators) with experience working in secular, Protestant or Catholic health care systems in Illinois. A thematic content approach was used to identify themes related to participants' experiences with abortion policies, the role of ethics committees, the impact on patient care and conflicts with hospital policies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Few limitations on abortion were reported in secular hospitals, while Catholic hospitals prohibited most abortions, and a Protestant-affiliated system banned abortions deemed \"elective.\" Religiously affiliated hospitals allowed abortions in specific cases, if approved through an ethics consultation. Interpretation of system-wide policies varied by hospital, with some indication that institutional discomfort with abortion influenced policy as much as religious teachings did. Providers constrained by religious restrictions referred or transferred patients desiring abortion, including for pregnancy complications, with those in Protestant hospitals having more latitude to directly refer such patients. As a result of religiously influenced policies, patients could encounter delays, financial obstacles, restrictions on treatment and stigmatization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients seeking abortion or presenting with pregnancy complications at Catholic and Protestant hospitals may encounter more delays and fewer treatment options than they would at secular hospitals. More research is needed to better understand the implications for women's access to reproductive health care.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"52 2","pages":"107-115"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1363/psrh.12148","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"My Hands Are Tied\\\": Abortion Restrictions and Providers' Experiences in Religious and Nonreligious Health Care Systems.\",\"authors\":\"Lee A Hasselbacher,&nbsp;Luciana E Hebert,&nbsp;Yuan Liu,&nbsp;Debra B Stulberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1363/psrh.12148\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Abortion is generally prohibited in Catholic hospitals, but less is known about abortion restrictions in other religiously affiliated health care facilities. As religiously affiliated health systems expand in the United States, it is important to understand how religious restrictions affect the practices of providers who treat pregnant patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From September 2016 to May 2018, in-depth interviews were conducted with 31 key informants (clinical providers, ethicists, chaplains and health system administrators) with experience working in secular, Protestant or Catholic health care systems in Illinois. A thematic content approach was used to identify themes related to participants' experiences with abortion policies, the role of ethics committees, the impact on patient care and conflicts with hospital policies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Few limitations on abortion were reported in secular hospitals, while Catholic hospitals prohibited most abortions, and a Protestant-affiliated system banned abortions deemed \\\"elective.\\\" Religiously affiliated hospitals allowed abortions in specific cases, if approved through an ethics consultation. Interpretation of system-wide policies varied by hospital, with some indication that institutional discomfort with abortion influenced policy as much as religious teachings did. Providers constrained by religious restrictions referred or transferred patients desiring abortion, including for pregnancy complications, with those in Protestant hospitals having more latitude to directly refer such patients. As a result of religiously influenced policies, patients could encounter delays, financial obstacles, restrictions on treatment and stigmatization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients seeking abortion or presenting with pregnancy complications at Catholic and Protestant hospitals may encounter more delays and fewer treatment options than they would at secular hospitals. More research is needed to better understand the implications for women's access to reproductive health care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health\",\"volume\":\"52 2\",\"pages\":\"107-115\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1363/psrh.12148\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12148\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/6/29 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.12148","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/6/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

背景:天主教医院一般禁止堕胎,但对其他宗教附属保健机构的堕胎限制了解较少。随着美国宗教附属卫生系统的扩大,了解宗教限制如何影响治疗孕妇的提供者的做法是很重要的。方法:2016年9月至2018年5月,对31名具有伊利诺伊州世俗、新教或天主教卫生保健系统工作经验的关键举报人(临床提供者、伦理学家、牧师和卫生系统管理员)进行深度访谈。采用主题内容办法确定与与会者对堕胎政策的经验、伦理委员会的作用、对病人护理的影响以及与医院政策的冲突有关的主题。结果:据报道,世俗医院对堕胎的限制很少,而天主教医院禁止大多数堕胎,新教附属系统禁止被视为“选择性”的堕胎。宗教附属医院允许在特定情况下堕胎,如果经过伦理咨询批准的话。对全系统政策的解释因医院而异,有迹象表明,机构对堕胎的不适影响政策的程度不亚于宗教教义。受宗教限制的提供者转诊或转移希望堕胎的病人,包括因妊娠并发症而堕胎的病人,而新教医院的提供者在直接转诊这类病人方面有更大的自由。由于受宗教影响的政策,患者可能会遇到延误、经济障碍、治疗限制和污名化。结论:在天主教和新教医院寻求流产或出现妊娠并发症的患者可能比在世俗医院遇到更多的延误和更少的治疗选择。需要进行更多的研究,以便更好地了解对妇女获得生殖保健的影响。
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
"My Hands Are Tied": Abortion Restrictions and Providers' Experiences in Religious and Nonreligious Health Care Systems.

Context: Abortion is generally prohibited in Catholic hospitals, but less is known about abortion restrictions in other religiously affiliated health care facilities. As religiously affiliated health systems expand in the United States, it is important to understand how religious restrictions affect the practices of providers who treat pregnant patients.

Methods: From September 2016 to May 2018, in-depth interviews were conducted with 31 key informants (clinical providers, ethicists, chaplains and health system administrators) with experience working in secular, Protestant or Catholic health care systems in Illinois. A thematic content approach was used to identify themes related to participants' experiences with abortion policies, the role of ethics committees, the impact on patient care and conflicts with hospital policies.

Results: Few limitations on abortion were reported in secular hospitals, while Catholic hospitals prohibited most abortions, and a Protestant-affiliated system banned abortions deemed "elective." Religiously affiliated hospitals allowed abortions in specific cases, if approved through an ethics consultation. Interpretation of system-wide policies varied by hospital, with some indication that institutional discomfort with abortion influenced policy as much as religious teachings did. Providers constrained by religious restrictions referred or transferred patients desiring abortion, including for pregnancy complications, with those in Protestant hospitals having more latitude to directly refer such patients. As a result of religiously influenced policies, patients could encounter delays, financial obstacles, restrictions on treatment and stigmatization.

Conclusions: Patients seeking abortion or presenting with pregnancy complications at Catholic and Protestant hospitals may encounter more delays and fewer treatment options than they would at secular hospitals. More research is needed to better understand the implications for women's access to reproductive health care.

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
Sexual choking/strangulation and its association with condom and contraceptive use: Findings from a survey of students at a university in the Midwestern United States. Understanding abortion legality and trimester of abortion care in Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky, three abortion‐restrictive states Abortion assistance fund staff and volunteers as patient navigators following an abortion ban in Texas. Abortion-related crowdfunding post-Dobbs. Medicaid's role in alleviating some of the financial burden of abortion: Findings from the 2021-2022 Abortion Patient Survey.
×
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