Disparities in Abortion Rates: A Public Health Approach

被引:119
作者
Dehlendorf, Christine [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Harris, Lisa H. [4 ,5 ]
Weitz, Tracy A. [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Family & Community Med, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[2] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Obstet Gynecol & Reprod Sci, San Francisco, CA USA
[3] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[4] Univ Michigan, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[5] Univ Michigan, Dept Womens Studies, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[6] Univ Calif San Francisco, Bixby Ctr Global Reprod Hlth, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
关键词
2002; NATIONAL-SURVEY; UNINTENDED PREGNANCY; CONTRACEPTIVE USE; UNITED-STATES; PRENATAL-CARE; RACIAL DISPARITIES; EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION; NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT; SOCIOECONOMIC-STATUS; SEXUAL-BEHAVIORS;
D O I
10.2105/AJPH.2013.301339
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Women of lower socioeconomic status and women of color in the United States have higher rates of abortion than women of higher socioeconomic status and White women. Opponents of abortion use these statistics to argue that abortion providers are exploiting women of color and low socioeconomic status, and thus, regulations are needed to protect women. This argument ignores the underlying causes of the disparities. As efforts to restrict abortion will have no effect on these underlying factors, and instead will only result in more women experiencing later abortions or having an unintended childbirth, they are likely to result in worsening health disparities. We provide a review of the causes of abortion disparities and argue for a multifaceted public health approach to address them.
引用
收藏
页码:1772 / 1779
页数:8
相关论文
共 120 条
[61]   Strategies to improve adherence and acceptability of hormonal methods of contraception [J].
Halpern, Vera ;
Lopez, Laureen M. ;
Grimes, David A. ;
Gallo, Maria F. .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2011, (04)
[62]  
Harris LH, 2012, OBSTET GYNECOL, V120, P1472, DOI [10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182723d82, http://10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182723d82]
[63]  
Hatcher R.A., 2007, CONTRACEPTIVE TECHNO, V19th
[64]  
Henshaw S, 2009, RESTRICTIONS ON MEDI
[65]   FACTORS HINDERING ACCESS TO ABORTION SERVICES [J].
HENSHAW, SK .
FAMILY PLANNING PERSPECTIVES, 1995, 27 (02) :54-&
[66]   THE MEDICAID CUTOFF AND ABORTION SERVICES FOR THE POOR [J].
HENSHAW, SK ;
WALLISCH, LS .
FAMILY PLANNING PERSPECTIVES, 1984, 16 (04) :170-&
[67]  
Institute of Medicine Committee on Understanding and Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care, 2003, Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care
[68]   Legal Barriers to Second-Trimester Abortion Provision and Public Health Consequences [J].
Jones, Bonnie Scott ;
Weitz, Tracy A. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2009, 99 (04) :623-630
[69]  
Jones J, 2012, NATL HEALTH STAT REP, P60
[70]   Who has second-trimester abortions in the United States? [J].
Jones, Rachel K. ;
Finer, Lawrence B. .
CONTRACEPTION, 2012, 85 (06) :544-551