
- Vol 64 No 11
- Volume 64
- Issue 11
Reproductive health care in America: A story of give and take
Fifty years after Roe and Title X, the right to reproductive freedom continues to come under fire.
Women’s reproductive freedom has advanced significantly over the past 100 years. Abortion rates have steadily declined in the United States over the last quarter century, falling to 14.6 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44 in 2014, the lowest rate ever recorded.1 As pointed out by the authors of this report, the overwhelming majority of abortions occur in the first trimester. Second-trimester abortions account for only a small fraction of all abortions in the United States; as of 2015, 7.6% of all abortions occurred between 14 and 20 weeks and only 1.4% occurred at 21 weeks or more. However, as abortion rates fall the obstacles to access for first-trimester and more critically second-trimester procedures have become increasingly burdensome.
Historical perspective on abortion
Before 1880, abortion was commonly practiced in the United States. Over the next half century, anti-abortion sentiments began to increase in response to the growing movements for women’s suffrage and birth control. Many states passed legislation that confined women to traditional childbearing roles and banned abortion except in extreme circumstances. These regulations forced women to seek illegal abortions from unregulated, often unskilled abortion providers or to use unsafe self-induced methods which often led to sepsis and, sometimes, death.
The
In the late 1960s,
Landmark Supreme Court cases
In the landmark
Subsequently,
Title X
Paralleling the judicial expansion of reproductive rights, in 1970 Congress enacted
Title X programs are jeopardized by recent legislative efforts such as the Title X “Gag Rule.” The proposed final rule would force a medical provider receiving federal assistance to refuse to promote, refer for, perform or support abortion as a method of family planning. This has led many family planning programs, such as Planned Parenthood, to drop out of participation in Title X rather than attempting to comply with these restrictive regulations. Those who are most vulnerable to the “Gag Rule” are minority women, lower socioeconomic status women, and adolescent girls who are disproportionately impacted by unintended pregnancy rates and subsequent abortion rates, and many rural and urban community health centers, particularly those serving poor women on Medicaid, are left with fewer options for family planning services. The result could be reversal of the 30-year drop in adolescent pregnancy rates and the lower rates of abortion that we have seen over the last quarter century.
Access to affordable and available contraception is the premise of the foundation for Title X and one of the guaranteed preventive women’s health services described under the Affordable Care Act. In 2018, ACOG along with at least 10 other health care organizations provided testimony opposing elimination of the contraceptive mandate proposed for Health and Human Services. Worldwide almost 25% of maternal deaths are due to an unmet need for contraception.
Current legal restrictions
More than a century since the Comstock Act, women’s access to reproductive health care including abortion and contraception is threatened through legislative backlash against reproductive choice, and abortion access is more vulnerable than ever due to legislative attempts at the state and national levels to disenfranchise women and marginalize rights to legal reproductive choices. States have enacted a growing number of abortion restrictions that the courts have found not to be “undue burdens,” including mandatory waiting periods, physician scripting, parental involvement, and specific facility requirements for abortion clinics. Since Roe v Wade, 1200 restrictions have been enacted; recently the pace of abortion restrictions has accelerated, and the nature of the restrictions more severely curtails access. An increasing number of states have passed extremely restrictive abortion laws intending to test the protections of Roe v Wade in the Supreme Court.
References:
- 1. Jatlaoui TC, Boutot ME, Mandel MG, et al. Abortion surveillance – United States, 2015. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2018;67(No. SS-13):1-45.
- 2. Comstock Act (Law) History of Contraception, Anthony Comstock.
https://case.edu/affil/skuyhistcontraception/online-2012/Comstock.htmlw . Accessed 10/24/2019.
- 3. Roe v Wade Law Case. Summary. Encyclopedia Britannica. w
ww.britannica.com/event/Roe-v-Wade . Accessed 10/24/2019.
Articles in this issue
almost 6 years ago
Endometriosis for the generalistalmost 6 years ago
When is it time for the ob/gyn to assume care?almost 6 years ago
Uterine allografts: A new era in reproductionalmost 6 years ago
Preterm birth phenotypes in women with autoimmune diseasealmost 6 years ago
STDs on increase in CDC reportabout 6 years ago
Sexual minority women and contraceptive useabout 6 years ago
Early menopause and risk of CVDNewsletter
Get the latest clinical updates, case studies, and expert commentary in obstetric and gynecologic care. Sign up now to stay informed.