Sydney School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
College of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Gia Lam District, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024 Mar 8;21(3):312. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21030312.
(1) Background: Access to abortion care is a crucial reproductive health right. Refugees and migrants may have restricted access to and utilisation of abortion care, associated with histories of displacement, precarious migrant and citizenship status and difficulty navigating unfamiliar host country healthcare systems. However, there is limited evidence on the abortion experiences and perspectives of refugees and migrants. Moreover, existing research has not been synthesised to identify trends informing sexual and reproductive care access among this marginalised population. This systematic review aimed to address this gap in the cumulative evidence on refugee and migrant experiences and perspectives of abortion in host countries. (2) Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched the following databases for studies on refugee and migrant abortion attitudes, decision making and experiences: Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, Sociological Abstracts, and Scopus. We also searched the grey literature on the same. Inclusion criteria specified qualitative studies involving migrant and/or refugee populations, examining their abortion experiences, attitudes or perspectives, written in English, published between January 2000 and December 2022. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full-text articles, resulting in 27 articles included in the review, following consensus checks by two co-authors. The included studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. (3) Results: Abortion was stigmatised and generally considered impermissible and undesirable. However, participants discussed socioculturally determined 'exceptions' to this, positing circumstances where abortion was acceptable. There were striking differences in experiences between participants in higher-income settings and those in lower- and middle-income settings. Difficulties accessing care were ubiquitous but were heightened in lower-resource settings and among participants with precarious citizenship, financial and legal statuses. (4) Conclusions: The findings highlight the need for an international convention to guide policy and programming that acknowledges the specific abortion requirements of migrant and refugee communities, with attention to their financial, legal and social precarity.
(1) 背景:获得堕胎护理是一项至关重要的生殖健康权利。难民和移民可能在获得和利用堕胎护理方面受到限制,这与流离失所、不稳定的移民和公民身份以及难以在陌生的东道国医疗保健系统中导航有关。然而,关于难民和移民的堕胎经历和观点的证据有限。此外,现有的研究尚未综合起来,以确定告知这一边缘化人群获得性和生殖保健机会的趋势。本系统评价旨在解决有关难民和移民在东道国堕胎经历和观点的累积证据中的这一空白。(2) 方法:根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目 (PRISMA) 指南,我们在以下数据库中搜索了关于难民和移民堕胎态度、决策和经历的研究:Embase、Medline、CINAHL、Web of Science、社会学文摘和 Scopus。我们还在同一数据库中搜索了灰色文献。纳入标准规定了涉及移民和/或难民人口的定性研究,研究其堕胎经历、态度或观点,以英文撰写,发表于 2000 年 1 月至 2022 年 12 月之间。两名审查员对标题、摘要和全文文章进行了筛选,经过两名合著者的共识检查,最终有 27 篇文章纳入了综述。纳入的研究使用批判性评估技能计划工具评估方法学质量。(3) 结果:堕胎受到污名化,通常被认为是不可接受和不可取的。然而,参与者讨论了这种情况的社会文化决定的“例外”,提出了在某些情况下堕胎是可以接受的。在高收入环境中的参与者和低收入和中等收入环境中的参与者之间,堕胎经历存在显著差异。获取护理的困难普遍存在,但在资源较少的环境中以及在公民身份、财务和法律地位不稳定的参与者中更为突出。(4) 结论:这些发现强调需要一项国际公约来指导政策和规划,承认移民和难民社区的具体堕胎需求,并关注他们的财务、法律和社会脆弱性。