Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California, San Francisco, Oakland, California 94612, USA.
Womens Health Issues. 2010 Jan-Feb;20(1):12-9. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2009.08.005.
Most states regulate abortion differently than other health care services. Examples of these regulations include mandating waiting periods and the provision of state-authored information, and prohibiting private and public insurance coverage for abortion. The primary purpose of this paper is to explore abortion patients' perspectives on these regulations.
We recruited 20 participants from three abortion providing facilities located in two states in the U.S. South and Midwest. Using a survey and semistructured interview, we collected information about women's knowledge of abortion regulation and policy preferences. During the interviews, women weighed the pros and cons of abortion regulations. We used grounded theory analytical techniques and matrix analysis to organize and interpret the data.
We discovered five themes in these women's considerations of regulation: responsibility, empathy, safe and accessible health care, privacy, and equity. Women in the study generally supported policies that they felt protected women or informed decisions. However, most women also opposed laws mandating two-day abortion appointments for women who were traveling long distances. Women tended to favor financial coverage of abortion, arguing that it could help poor women afford abortion or reduce state expenditures.
Overall the study participants' opinions on abortion policy reflect key values for advocates and policy makers to consider: responsibility, empathy, safe and accessible health care, privacy, and equity. Future work should examine abortion regulations in light of these shared values. Laws that promote misinformation or prohibit accommodations of unique circumstances are not consistent the positions articulated by the subjects in our study.
大多数州对堕胎的监管与其他医疗保健服务不同。这些规定的例子包括规定等待期和提供州授权的信息，以及禁止私人和公共保险覆盖堕胎。本文的主要目的是探讨堕胎患者对这些规定的看法。
我们从美国南部和中西部的两个州的三个堕胎提供机构招募了 20 名参与者。我们使用调查和半结构化访谈收集了有关女性对堕胎监管和政策偏好的信息。在访谈中，女性权衡了堕胎监管的利弊。我们使用扎根理论分析技术和矩阵分析来组织和解释数据。
我们在这些女性对监管的考虑中发现了五个主题：责任、同理心、安全和便捷的医疗保健、隐私和公平。研究中的女性普遍支持她们认为保护女性或知情决策的政策。然而，大多数女性也反对为长途旅行的女性规定两天的堕胎预约的法律。女性倾向于支持堕胎的财务覆盖，认为这可以帮助贫困妇女负担得起堕胎或减少国家支出。
总的来说，研究参与者对堕胎政策的看法反映了倡导者和政策制定者需要考虑的关键价值观：责任、同理心、安全和便捷的医疗保健、隐私和公平。未来的工作应该根据这些共同的价值观来审查堕胎法规。那些促进错误信息或禁止特殊情况适应的法律与我们研究对象所表达的立场不一致。
