Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

Scholarly Works (18 results)

  • Article
  • Peer Reviewed
UC San Francisco Previously Published Works (2018)
Over the past two decades, US states have enacted legislation regulating ultrasound scanning in abortion care, including mandating that abortion patients view their ultrasound image. Legal scholars have argued that, by constructing ultrasound viewing as a necessary part of patients' abortion decision making, these laws aim to control and constrain how women make personal decisions about their bodies and parenthood. To date, however, the discussion of the impact of ultrasound viewing laws on women's decisional autonomy has occurred in the abstract. Here, we examine the effect of Wisconsin's mandatory ultrasound viewing law on the viewing behavior of women seeking care at a high-volume abortion-providing facility. Drawing both on chart data from patients before and after the law went into effect and on in-depth interviews with women subject to the mandatory viewing law, we found that the presence of the law impacted patients' viewing decision making. Moreover, we documented a differential effect of the law by race, with larger impacts on the viewing behavior of black women compared with white women. Our findings call for renewed attention to the coercive power of laws regulating abortion on a macrolevel, investigating not only how they affect individuals' behavior and experience but also which individuals are impacted.
    Cover page: Coercing Women’s BehaviorHow a Mandatory Viewing Law Changes Patients’ Preabortion Ultrasound Viewing Practices
    • Article
    • Peer Reviewed
    UC San Francisco Previously Published Works (2017)

    Background

    Access to abortion care in the United States is limited by the availability of abortion providers and their geographic distribution. We aimed to assess how far women travel for Medicaid-funded abortion in California and identify disparities in access to abortion care.

    Methods

    We obtained data on all abortions reimbursed by the fee-for-service California state Medicaid program (Medi-Cal) in 2011 and 2012 and examined distance traveled to obtain abortion care by several demographic and abortion-related factors. Mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to examine factors associated with traveling 50 miles or more. County-level t-tests and linear regressions were conducted to examine the effects of a Medi-Cal abortion provider in a county on overall and urban/rural differences in utilization.

    Results

    11.9% (95% CI: 11.5-12.2%) of women traveled 50 miles or more. Women obtaining second trimester or later abortions (21.7%), women obtaining abortions at hospitals (19.9%), and rural women (51.0%) were most likely to travel 50 miles or more. Across the state, 28 counties, home to 10% of eligible women, did not have a facility routinely providing Medi-Cal-covered abortions.

    Conclusions

    Efforts are needed to expand the number of abortion providers that accept Medi-Cal. This could be accomplished by increasing Medi-Cal reimbursement rates, increasing the types of providers who can provide abortions, and expanding the use of telemedicine. If national trends in declining unintended pregnancy and abortion rates continue, careful attention should be paid to ensure that reduced demand does not lead to greater disparities in geographic and financial access to abortion care by ensuring that providers accepting Medicaid payment are available and widely distributed.
      Cover page: Distance traveled for Medicaid-covered abortion care in California
      • Article
      • Peer Reviewed
      UC San Francisco Previously Published Works (2018)
      OBJECTIVES:We know little about women's interest in and experiences with a printout of their preabortion ultrasound image. METHODS:We conducted a mixed-methods study at a large-volume abortion-providing facility where patients are offered the opportunity to receive their ultrasound printout, using 2 years of abstracted medical chart data on demographics and printout acceptance and interviews with patients about whether they took a printout and, if they did, why and what they did with it. We analyzed chart data using multivariable logistic regression to examine predictors of printout acceptance and interviews using elaborative coding and modified grounded theory. RESULTS:We abstracted data from 5342 charts and interviewed 23 women. Thirty-eight percent of all patients and 61% of interviewees accepted the printout. Predictors of accepting the printout included being younger, being nonwhite, having a partner who is a boyfriend or friend, and not having a support person at the visit. Interviewees reported that they accepted the printout simply because it was offered, out of curiosity and as part of confirming their abortion decision. They described various uses for the printout, including sharing with others, consulting before their abortion appointment, retaining as a keepsake and nothing at all. CONCLUSIONS:Some abortion patients are interested in receiving a printout of their ultrasound image and find it useful. Women accept a printout for a range of reasons and use it in various ways; there is no singular experience or use of the printout. IMPLICATIONS:We find no evidence that taking a printout of the preabortion ultrasound image causes emotional distress, nor did we find that it was expressly important for any patient's experience. Providers should consider providing interested patients with a printout, if they have the capability to do so, when they request one.
        Cover page: Women's experiences of their preabortion ultrasound image printoutCreative Commons 'BY-NC-ND' version 4.0 license
        • Article
        • Peer Reviewed
        UC San Diego Previously Published Works (2022)
        Bullying of sexual minorities in the United States is common and often begins in middle and high school, yet research that examines sexual harassment of sexual minorities is limited. This study examines whether sexual minorities are more likely than straight people to (a) report sexual harassment and (b) report sexual harassment as adolescents at middle or high school. We analyzed survey data from a cross-sectional study of sexual harassment and assault, conducted with nationally representative samples of adults in 2019 (N = 2,205). Sexual harassment was categorized as non-physically aggressive sexual harassment only (NPSH; e.g., verbal or cyber harassment), physically aggressive sexual harassment (PSH; e.g., stalking, rubbing up against you; with or without NPSH), sexual assault (SA; i.e., forced sex; with or without NPSH or PSH), or no sexual harassment (none). In total, 6% of female and male respondents identified as a sexual minority. A history of sexual harassment or assault was reported by 95.0% of sexual minority women and 80.3% of straight women (p = .001), and by 77.3% of sexual minority men and 41.3% of straight men (p = .001). Multivariable multinomial models demonstrate that sexual minorities were more likely than straight individuals to report NPSH (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 2.88, 95% [Confidence Interval] CI = [1.33, 6.20]), PSH (AOR = 4.15, 95% CI: [1.77, 9.77]), and SA (AOR = 5.48, 95% CI = [2.56, 11.73]; reference group: no harassment), as well as to report PSH (AOR = 2.67, 95% CI = [1.30, 5.47]) at school in middle or high school. These abuses demonstrate increased risk for sexual harassment among sexual minorities, including increased risk for physically aggressive sexual harassment when in middle and high school.
          Cover page: Do Sexual Minorities Face Greater Risk for Sexual Harassment, Ever and at School, in Adolescence?
          • Article
          • Peer Reviewed
          UC San Diego Previously Published Works (2023)
          Research on discrimination and risks for violence and mental health issues under the pandemic is notably absent. We examined the relative effects of perceived everyday discrimination (e.g., poorer service, disrespectful treatment in a typical week) and major experiences of race-based discrimination (e.g., racial/ethnic discrimination in housing or employment at any point in the lifetime) on experiences of violence and the PHQ-4 assessment of symptoms of depression and anxiety under the pandemic. We analyzed state-representative cross-sectional survey data from California adults (N = 2114) collected in March 2021. We conducted multivariate regression models adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, income, and disability. One in four Californians (26.1%) experienced everyday discrimination in public spaces, due most often to race/ethnicity and gender. We found that everyday discrimination was significantly associated with past year physical violence (single form Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 5.0, 95% CI 2.5-10.3; multiple forms AOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-5.8), past year sexual violence (multiple forms AOR 2.5, 95% CI 1.4-4.4), and mental health symptoms (e.g., severe symptoms, multiple forms AOR 3.3, 95% CI 1.6-6.7). Major experiences of race-based discrimination (reported by 10.0% of Californians) were associated with past year sexual violence (AOR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1-3.8) and severe mental health symptoms (AOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-6.2). Non-race-based major discrimination (reported by 23.9% of Californians) was also associated with violence and mental health outcomes Everyday discrimination, more than major experiences of discrimination, was associated with higher risk for violence and poor mental health outcomes during the pandemic. Non-race-based forms of major discrimination independently were also associated with these negative outcomes. Findings indicate that efforts to reduce and ultimately eliminate discrimination should be a focus of public health and COVID-19 rebuilding efforts.
            Cover page: The associations of everyday and major discrimination exposure with violence and poor mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic
            • Article
            • Peer Reviewed
            UC San Diego Previously Published Works (2019)
            The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of MEN Count, a race- and gender-tailored three-session counseling intervention, on HIV/STI incidence as well as housing and employment. A two-armed quasi-experimental design was used to compare MEN Count to an attention comparison condition focused on stress reduction, from March 2014 to April 2017. Participants (N = 454) were Black heterosexual men in Washington DC, largely recruited from an STI clinic. Multivariate difference-in-difference regressions assessed whether the intervention was associated with significant changes in the outcomes set, which included nonviral STI incidence, sexual risk categorization, housing, and employment. Significant improvements over time were observed across both treatment arms for all outcomes (p < .05). Reductions in unemployment were significantly greater for intervention than for control participants (AOR unemployment = 0.48, 95% CI [0.23, 0.99]). Improvements in other outcomes did not differ significantly by treatment group. In dose analyses, participants receiving all intervention sessions were significantly less likely than control participants to have experienced homelessness in the 90 days prior (AOR= 0.31, 95% CI [0.10, 0.96]) and to be unemployed (AOR = 0.37, 95% CI [0.14, 0.96]). The MEN Count intervention offers a promising approach to address structural risk factors for STI, but not STI itself, among this largely STI clinic-based sample.
              Cover page: Evaluation of the Making Employment Needs (MEN) Count Intervention to Reduce HIV/STI Risk for Black Heterosexual Men in Washington DC
              • Article
              • Peer Reviewed
              UC San Francisco Previously Published Works (2018)

              Abortion is a common medical procedure, yet its availability has become more limited across the United States over the past decade. Women who do not know where to go for abortion care may use the internet to find abortion facility information, and there appears to be more online searches for abortion in states with more restrictive abortion laws. While previous studies have examined the distances women must travel to reach an abortion provider, to our knowledge no studies have used a systematic online search to document the geographic locations and services of abortion facilities.

              The objective of our study was to describe abortion facilities and services available in the United States from the perspective of a potential patient searching online and to identify US cities where people must travel the farthest to obtain abortion care.

              In early 2017, we conducted a systematic online search for abortion facilities in every state and the largest cities in each state. We recorded facility locations, types of abortion services available, and facility gestational limits. We then summarized the frequencies by region and state. If the online information was incomplete or unclear, we called the facility using a mystery shopper method, which simulates the perspective of patients calling for services. We also calculated distance to the closest abortion facility from all US cities with populations of 50,000 or more.

              We identified 780 facilities through our online search, with the fewest in the Midwest and South. Over 30% (236/780, 30.3%) of all facilities advertised the provision of medication abortion services only; this proportion was close to 40% in the Northeast (89/233, 38.2%) and West (104/262, 39.7%). The lowest gestational limit at which services were provided was 12 weeks in Wyoming; the highest was 28 weeks in New Mexico. People in 27 US cities must travel over 100 miles (160 km) to reach an abortion facility; the state with the largest number of such cities is Texas (n=10).

              Online searches can provide detailed information about the location of abortion facilities and the types of services they provide. However, these facilities are not evenly distributed geographically, and many large US cities do not have an abortion facility. Long distances can push women to seek abortion in later gestations when care is even more limited.

                • Article
                • Peer Reviewed
                UC San Francisco Previously Published Works (2019)

                Background

                To estimate the proportion of pregnant women in Louisiana who do not obtain abortions because Medicaid does not cover abortion.

                Methods

                Two hundred sixty nine women presenting at first prenatal visits in Southern Louisiana, 2015-2017, completed self-administered iPad surveys and structured interviews. Women reporting having considered abortion were asked whether Medicaid not paying for abortion was a reason they had not had an abortion. Using study data and published estimates of births, abortions, and Medicaid-covered births in Louisiana, we projected the proportion of Medicaid births that would instead be abortions if Medicaid covered abortion in Louisiana.

                Results

                28% considered abortion. Among women with Medicaid, 7.2% [95% CI 4.1-12.3] reported Medicaid not paying as a reason they did not have an abortion. Existing estimates suggest 10% of Louisiana pregnancies end in abortion. If Medicaid covered abortion, this would increase to 14% [95% CI 12, 16]. 29% [95% CI 19, 41] of Medicaid eligible pregnant women who would have an abortion with Medicaid coverage, instead give birth.

                Conclusions

                For a substantial proportion of pregnant women in Louisiana, the lack of Medicaid funding remains an insurmountable barrier to obtaining an abortion. Forty years after the Hyde Amendment was passed, lack of Medicaid funding for abortion continues to have substantial impacts on women's ability to obtain abortions.
                  Cover page: Estimating the proportion of Medicaid-eligible pregnant women in Louisiana who do not get abortions when Medicaid does not cover abortion
                  • Article
                  • Peer Reviewed
                  UCSF Open Access Publishing Fund (2018)
                    • Article
                    • Peer Reviewed
                    UC San Francisco Previously Published Works (2018)

                    Context

                    Recent legislation in states across the United States has required governmental health agencies to take on new and different roles in relation to abortion. While there has been media attention to health department roles in regulating abortion providers, there has been no systematic investigation of the range of activities in which state and local health departments are engaged.

                    Objective

                    To systematically investigate health department activities related to abortion.

                    Methods

                    We searched state health department Web sites of the 50 states and District of Columbia using key words such as "abortion" and "pregnancy termination". Two trained coders categorized 6093 documents using the 10 Essential Public Health Services (EPHS) framework. We then applied these methods to 671 local health department documents.

                    Setting

                    State and local health department Web sites.

                    Participants

                    N/A.

                    Results

                    On average, states engaged in 5.1 of 10 Essential Services related to abortion. Most (76%-98%) state health departments engaged in activities to Monitor Health Status (EPHS1), Enforce Laws (EPHS6), and Evaluate Effectiveness, Accessibility, and Quality (EPHS9). Many (47%-69%) engaged in activities to Inform and Educate (EPHS3), Develop Policies (EPHS5), and Link to Services (EPHS7). A minority (4%-29%) engaged in activities to Diagnose and Investigate Health Problems (EPHS2), Mobilize Community Partnerships (EPHS4), and Assure Competent Workforce (EPHS8). No state engaged in Innovative Research (EPHS10). Few local health departments engaged in abortion-related activities.

                    Conclusions

                    While most state health departments engage in abortion-related activities, they appear to reflect what the law requires rather than the range of core public health activities. Additional research is needed to assess whether these services meet quality standards for public health services and determine how best to support governmental health agencies in their growing tasks. These findings raise important questions about the role of public health agencies and professionals in defining how health departments should be engaging with abortion.
                      Cover page: State and Local Health Department Activities Related to Abortion
                      Top