Reproductive Autonomy Is Nonnegotiable, Even in the Time of COVID ‐19
2020; Wiley; Volume: 52; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1363/psrh.12152
ISSN1931-2393
AutoresLeigh Senderowicz, Jenny A. Higgins,
Tópico(s)Reproductive Health and Technologies
ResumoPerspectives on Sexual and Reproductive HealthVolume 52, Issue 2 p. 81-85 VIEWPOINT Reproductive Autonomy Is Nonnegotiable, Even in the Time of COVID-19 Leigh Senderowicz, Corresponding Author Leigh Senderowicz [email protected] Collaborative for Reproductive Equity (CORE)Search for more papers by this authorJenny Higgins, Jenny Higgins Department of Gender and Women's Studies and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin–MadisonSearch for more papers by this author Leigh Senderowicz, Corresponding Author Leigh Senderowicz [email protected] Collaborative for Reproductive Equity (CORE)Search for more papers by this authorJenny Higgins, Jenny Higgins Department of Gender and Women's Studies and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin–MadisonSearch for more papers by this author First published: 29 June 2020 https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12152Citations: 8Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat REFERENCES 1 Hall KS et al., Centring sexual and reproductive health and justice in the global COVID-19 response, Lancet, 2020, 395(10231): 1175–1177, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30801-1. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30801-1 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 2 Upadhyay UD et al., Development and validation of a reproductive autonomy scale, Studies in Family Planning, 2014, 45(1): 19–41, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4465.2014.00374.x. 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2014.00374.x PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 3 Senderowicz L, Contraceptive autonomy: conceptions and measurement of a novel family planning indicator, Studies in Family Planning, 2020, 51(2): 161–176, https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12114. 10.1111/sifp.12114 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 4 Roberts D, Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction and the Meaning of Liberty, New York: Pantheon Books, 1997. Google Scholar 5 Chotiner I, The coronavirus and the interwoven threads of inequality and health, New Yorker, Apr. 14, 2020, https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/the-coronavirus-and-the-interwoven-threads-of-inequality-and-health. Google Scholar 6 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Joint statement on abortion access during the COVID-19 outbreak, 2020, https://www.acog.org/en/news/news-releases/2020/03/joint-statement-on-abortion-access-during-the-COVID-19-outbreak. Google Scholar 7 Jones RK, Lindberg L and Witwer E, COVID-19 abortion bans and their implications for public health, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2020, 52(2), https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12139. 10.1363/psrh.12139 Web of Science®Google Scholar 8 Grossman D, Abortions don't drain hospital resources, Boston Review, Apr. 17, 2020, https://bostonreview.net/science-nature-politics-law-justice/daniel-grossman-abortions-dont-drain-hospital-resources. Google Scholar 9 Raymond EG et al., No-test medication abortion: a sample protocol for increasing access during a pandemic and beyond, Contraception, 2020, 101(6): 361–366, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2020.04.005. 10.1016/j.contraception.2020.04.005 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 10 Adams J, Abortions without clinics: Amid COVID-19 crisis, let women self-manage abortion, Salon, Apr. 13, 2020, https://www.salon.com/2020/04/13/abortions-without-clinics-amid-covid-19-crisis-let-women-self-manage-abortion/. Google Scholar 11 Henderson JT et al., Safety of mifepristone abortions in clinical use, Contraception, 2005, 72(3): 175–178, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2005.03.011. 10.1016/j.contraception.2005.03.011 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 12 Raymond EG et al., Mortality of induced abortion, other outpatient surgical procedures and common activities in the United States, Contraception, 2014, 90(5): 476–479, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2014.07.012. 10.1016/j.contraception.2014.07.012 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 13 Make abortion more available during the pandemic—not less, editorial, New York Times, Mar. 26, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/26/opinion/abortion-law-coronavirus.html. Google Scholar 14 Marie Stopes International, Stories from the frontline: in the shadow of the COVID-19 pandemic, https://www.mariestopes.org/covid-19/stories-from-the-frontline/. Google Scholar 15 Senderowicz L, Sanhueza P and Langer A, Education, place of residence and utilization of legal abortion services in Mexico City, 2013-2015, International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2018, 44(2): 43–50, https://doi.org/10.1363/44e6318. 10.1363/44e6318 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 16 International Planned Parenthood Federation, How will the coronavirus affect access to safe abortion? Mar. 20, 2020, https://www.ippf.org/blogs/how-will-coronavirus-affect-access-safe-abortion. Google Scholar 17 Adams P, Amid Covid-19, a call for M.D.s to mail the abortion pill, New York Times, May 12, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/12/opinion/covid-abortion-pill.html. Google Scholar 18 Kaunitz AM, COVID-19 gynecology practice recommendations from ACOG, NEJM Journal Watch, Apr. 16, 2020, https://www.jwatch.org/na51312/2020/04/16/covid-19-gynecology-practice-recommendations-acog. Google Scholar 19 Borrero S, Twitter post, Apr. 22, 2020, https://twitter.com/SonyaBorrero/status/1252956730612473857. Google Scholar 20 Higgins JA, Celebration meets caution: LARC's boons, potential busts, and the benefits of a reproductive justice approach, Contraception, 2014, 89(4): 237–241, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2014.01.027. 10.1016/j.contraception.2014.01.027 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 21 Gomez AM, Fuentes L and Allina A, Women or LARC first? Reproductive autonomy and the promotion of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2014, 46(3): 171–175, https://doi.org/10.1363/46e1614. 10.1363/46e1614 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 22 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Committee for Contraception and Family Planning, COVID-19 contraception and family planning, Apr. 13, 2020, https://www.figo.org/covid-19-contraception-and-family-planning. Google Scholar 23 El Kak F, Covid-19: What implications for sexual and reproductive health and rights? Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters, Mar. 27, 2020, http://www.srhm.org/news/covid-19-what-implications-for-sexual-and-reproductive-health-and-rights/. Google Scholar 24 Sanger-Katz M, Set it and forget it: how better contraception could be a key to reducing poverty, New York Times, Dec. 18, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/upshot/set-it-and-forget-it-how-better-contraception-could-be-a-secret-to-reducing-poverty.html. Google Scholar 25 Krause E and Sawhill I, Celebrating Valentine's Day, with no regrets, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2017, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2017/02/13/celebrating-valentines-day-with-no-regrets/. Google Scholar 26 Sawhill I and Guyot K, Preventing Unplanned Pregnancy: Lessons from the States, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2019, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Preventing-Unplanned-Pregnancy-2.pdf. Google Scholar 27 Browne SP and LaLumia S, The effects of contraception on female poverty, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2014, 33(3): 602–622, https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.21761. 10.1002/pam.21761 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 28 Allen RH, The role of family planning in poverty reduction, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2007, 110(5): 999–1002, https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000287063.32004.23. 10.1097/01.AOG.0000287063.32004.23 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 29 Starbird E, Norton M and Marcus R, Investing in family planning: key to achieving the sustainable development goals, Global Health, Science and Practice, 2016, 4(2): 191–210, https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-15-00374. 10.9745/GHSP-D-15-00374 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 30 Foster DG, The problems with a poverty argument for long-acting reversible contraceptive promotion, American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 222(Suppl. 4): S861–S863, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.01.051. 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.01.051 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 31 Ashraf QH, Weil DN and Wilde J, The effect of fertility reduction on economic growth. Population and Development Review, 2013, 39(1): 97–130, https://www.jstor.org/stable/41811954. 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2013.00575.x PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 32 Bloom D, Canning D and Sevilla J, The Demographic Dividend: A New Perspective on the Economic Consequences of Population Change, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2003, https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2007/MR1274.pdf. 10.7249/MR1274 Google Scholar 33 Population Reference Bureau, The challenge ahead: initiating a demographic dividend, International Conference on Family Planning, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, Nov. 12–15, 2013, http://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1864/EN-HLMM-DD.pdf. Google Scholar 34 Naik R, Improving nutrition and food security through family planning, Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2015, https://www.prb.org/engage-fp-nutrition-foodsecurity/. Google Scholar 35 Anderson DJ, Population and the environment—time for another contraception revolution, New England Journal of Medicine, 2019, 381(5): 397–399, https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1906733. 10.1056/NEJMp1906733 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 36 Campbell M, Sahin-Hodoglugil NN and Potts M, Barriers to fertility regulation: a review of the literature, Studies in Family Planning, 2006, 37(2): 87–98, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4465.2006.00088.x. 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2006.00088.x CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 37 Moniz MH et al., Inpatient postpartum long-acting reversible contraception: care that promotes reproductive justice, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017, 130(4): 783–787, https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002262. 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002262 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 38 Population Services International, Enabling the healthy spacing and limiting of pregnancies: programmatic approaches to expand postpartum IUD access, no date, https://www.psi.org/publication/enabling-the-healthy-spacing-and-limiting-of-pregnancies-programmatic-approaches-to-expand-postpartum-iud-access/. Google Scholar 39 de Caestecker L et al., Planning and implementation of a FIGO postpartum intrauterine device initiative in six countries, International Journal of Gynaecology & Obstetrics, 2018, 143(Suppl. 1): 4–12, https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12598. 10.1002/ijgo.12598 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 40 Senderowicz L, "I was obligated to accept": a qualitative exploration of contraceptive coercion, Social Science & Medicine, 2019, 239:112531, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112531. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112531 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 41 Towriss CA et al., The injection or the injection? Restricted contraceptive choices among women living with HIV, Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters, 2019, 27(1): 1628593, https://doi.org/10.1080/26410397.2019.1628593. 10.1080/26410397.2019.1628593 PubMedGoogle Scholar 42 Jhpiego, Burkina Faso: Investment in postpartum family planning gives women increased access, 2015, https://www.jhpiego.org/story/burkina-faso-investment-in-postpartum-family-planning-gives-women-increased-access/. Google Scholar 43 Pathfinder International, Expanding Contraceptive Options for Postpartum Women in Ethiopia: Introducing the Postpartum IUD, 2016, https://www.e2aproject.org/publication/expanding-contraceptive-options-for-postpartum-women-in-ethiopia-introducing-the-postpartum-iud/. Google Scholar 44 Senderowicz LG, Pearson E and Francis J, The effects of a PPIUD intervention on family planning counseling quality: results from stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial, paper presented at the 8th African Population Conference, Entebbe, Uganda, Nov. 18–22, 2019, http://uaps2019.popconf.org/abstracts/190163. Google Scholar 45 Daniels K and Abma J, Current contraceptive status among women aged 15–49: United States, 2015–2017, National Center for Health Statistics Data Brief, 2018, No. 328, https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db327.htm. Google Scholar 46 Sawhill I, The best New Year's resolution: intentional childbearing, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, Jan. 26, 2015, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2015/01/26/the-best-new-years-resolution-intentional-childbearing/. Google Scholar 47 Kramer RD et al., Racial and ethnic differences in patterns of long-acting reversible contraceptive use in the United States, 2011–2015, Contraception, 2018, 97(5): 399–404, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2018.01.006. 10.1016/j.contraception.2018.01.006 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 48 Brandi K and Fuentes L, The history of tiered-effectiveness contraceptive counseling and the importance of patient-centered family planning care, American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 222(Suppl. 4): S873–S877, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2019.11.1271. 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.11.1271 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 49 Christopherson S, NWHN–SisterSong joint statement of principles on LARCs, Washington, DC: National Women's Health Network, Nov. 14, 2016, https://www.nwhn.org/nwhn-joins-statement-principles-larcs/. Google Scholar 50 Gold R, Some lawmakers continue to promote contraceptive use in return for welfare, State Reproductive Health Monitor, 1995, 6(1): 3 & 6, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12289005/. Google Scholar 51 Dehlendorf C et al., Recommendations for intrauterine contraception: a randomized trial of the effects of patients' race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status, American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2010, 203(4): 319.e1–319.e8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2010.05.009. 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.05.009 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 52 Yancy CW, COVID-19 and African Americans, JAMA, 2020, 323(19): 1891–1892, https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2764789. 10.1001/jama.2020.6548 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Citing Literature Volume52, Issue2July 2020Pages 81-85 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Referência(s)