Arey Whitney, Lerma Klaira, Chatillon Anna, White Kari
Maternal and Child Health, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Durham, NC, USA; Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Contraception. 2025 Oct;150:111017. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2025.111017. Epub 2025 Jul 11.
To examine experiences of pregnant Texans who considered self-sourcing medication abortion following the September 2021 implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8, which prohibited abortions after detectable embryonic cardiac activity.
This qualitative research study used in-depth telephone interviews conducted between October 2021 and August 2022 with pregnant and recently pregnant Texas residents ≥16 years of age who considered abortion. We recruited participants from two sources: flyers posted at abortion facilities in nearby states and an online survey of Texans seeking abortion care. We interviewed participants who obtained out-of-state abortion care or who reported self-managing their abortion, having a miscarriage or an ectopic pregnancy, or continuing their pregnancy. We used inductive and deductive coding in our thematic analysis examining perceptions of self-sourcing medication abortion and potential use of a hypothetical telehealth abortion model.
Of the 120 participants interviewed, 50 researched or considered self-sourcing medication abortion, including 15 who ultimately sourced medications to self-manage their abortion. Participants described uncertainty about the safety and legality of their options for self-sourcing abortion medications, and most would have preferred to use telehealth abortion in a hypothetical legal policy context, including those who self-managed their abortion.
In the context of an abortion ban, people considered self-sourcing abortion medications, but had concerns about the legality and safety of doing so. People in states with restrictive abortion laws may benefit from information about how to access medication abortion from safe and reliable sources and mitigate their legal risks.
People perceive meaningful differences between the legality and safety of telehealth and self-managed medication abortion. Strategies are needed to provide pregnant people in restricted settings with clear information so they can make an informed choice for their personal circumstances.
探讨2021年9月德克萨斯州参议院法案8实施后,考虑自行获取药物流产的德州孕妇的经历。该法案禁止在检测到胚胎心脏活动后进行堕胎。
这项定性研究于2021年10月至2022年8月期间,对年龄≥16岁、考虑堕胎的德州孕妇及近期怀孕的居民进行了深入电话访谈。我们从两个渠道招募参与者:在邻近州的堕胎机构张贴传单,以及对寻求堕胎护理的德州人进行在线调查。我们采访了那些获得州外堕胎护理、或报告自行管理堕胎、流产、异位妊娠或继续妊娠的参与者。在主题分析中,我们使用归纳和演绎编码,研究对自行获取药物流产的看法以及对假设的远程医疗堕胎模式的潜在使用情况。
在接受采访的120名参与者中,50人研究或考虑过自行获取药物流产,其中15人最终获取药物自行管理了堕胎。参与者描述了自行获取堕胎药物选项的安全性和合法性方面的不确定性,并且大多数人在假设的合法政策背景下更愿意使用远程医疗堕胎,包括那些自行管理堕胎的人。
在堕胎禁令的背景下,人们考虑自行获取堕胎药物,但对这样做的合法性和安全性存在担忧。在堕胎法律严格的州,人们可能会受益于有关如何从安全可靠来源获取药物流产以及降低法律风险的信息。
人们认为远程医疗堕胎和自行管理药物流产在合法性和安全性方面存在显著差异。需要采取策略,为处于受限环境中的孕妇提供明确信息,以便她们能够根据个人情况做出明智选择。