Abortion service delivery in clinics by state policy climate in 2017
- PMID: 33083783
- PMCID: PMC7561526
- DOI: 10.1016/j.conx.2020.100043
Abortion service delivery in clinics by state policy climate in 2017
Abstract
Objective: The objective was to examine service delivery in clinics that provided abortions in 2017, including differences by abortion policy climate.
Study design: Using data from the Guttmacher Institute's 2017 Abortion Provider Census, we examine amount charged for abortion care, pregnancy gestation at which abortions were offered, number of days per week that clinics provided abortions and types of nonabortion services offered. Our analysis focuses on the 808 clinic facilities that provided 95% of abortions that year. Measures were calculated nationally and according to whether the clinic was in a state we categorized as hostile, middle ground or supportive of abortion rights.
Results: In 2017, 64% of clinics offered abortion at 11 weeks pregnancy gestation, and 22% did so at 20 weeks gestation. Supportive states had a higher density of clinics that provide abortion for every measured gestation than hostile states. Clinics charged an average of $549 for a surgical abortion at 10 weeks and $551 for medication abortion. Some 46% of clinics in supportive states offered abortion care 5 or more days per week compared to 29% in hostile states. Most clinics offered standalone contraception and family planning (87%) and gynecological care (85%), but the proportion of clinics that provided these services was higher in supportive states (93% and 90%) than in hostile states (75% and 73%).
Conclusions: A substantial proportion of abortion facilities provide a range of other health care services. Aspects of service delivery, such as number of days abortions are provided, may vary according to abortion policy climate.
Implications statement: Onerous policies in states hostile to abortion rights may inhibit some facilities from providing abortion more days per week, and if so, could further burden patients obtaining abortion care in these states.
Keywords: Abortion; Abortion clinics; Abortion cost; Health care access; Policy.
© 2020 The Authors.
Similar articles
-
Differences in Abortion Service Delivery in Hostile, Middle-ground, and Supportive States in 2014.Womens Health Issues. 2018 May-Jun;28(3):212-218. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2017.12.003. Epub 2018 Jan 12. Womens Health Issues. 2018. PMID: 29339010 Free PMC article.
-
Factors hindering access to abortion services.Fam Plann Perspect. 1995 Mar-Apr;27(2):54-9, 87. Fam Plann Perspect. 1995. PMID: 7796896
-
Freestanding abortion clinics: services, structure, fees.Fam Plann Perspect. 1982 Sep-Oct;14(5):248-50, 253-6. Fam Plann Perspect. 1982. PMID: 6926970
-
The economic impact of state restrictions on abortion: parental consent and notification laws and Medicaid funding restrictions.J Policy Anal Manage. 1993 Summer;12(3):498-511. J Policy Anal Manage. 1993. PMID: 10127357 Review.
-
Safe Abortion: Technical and Policy Guidance for Health Systems.2nd edition. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012. 2nd edition. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012. PMID: 23700650 Free Books & Documents. Review.
Cited by
-
Association of Texas' 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy With the Number of Facility-Based Abortions in Texas and Surrounding States.JAMA. 2022 Nov 22;328(20):2048-2055. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.20423. JAMA. 2022. PMID: 36318197 Free PMC article.
-
Abortion patients' decision making about where to obtain out-of-state care following Texas' 2021 abortion ban.Health Serv Res. 2024 Feb;59(1):e14226. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.14226. Epub 2023 Sep 12. Health Serv Res. 2024. PMID: 37700552 Free PMC article.
-
Association Between Rates of Down Syndrome Diagnosis in States With vs Without 20-Week Abortion Bans From 2011 to 2018.JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Mar 1;6(3):e233684. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.3684. JAMA Netw Open. 2023. PMID: 36943268 Free PMC article.
-
Patient experiences using public and private insurance coverage for abortion in Illinois: Implementation successes and remaining gaps.Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2024 Sep;56(3):269-281. doi: 10.1111/psrh.12259. Epub 2024 Apr 11. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2024. PMID: 38605588 Free PMC article.
-
The future of abortion is now: Mifepristone by mail and in-clinic abortion access in the United States.Contraception. 2021 Jul;104(1):38-42. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2021.03.033. Epub 2021 Apr 17. Contraception. 2021. PMID: 33844980 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Jones R.K., Witwer E., Jerman J. Vol. 2017. Guttmacher Institute; New York: 2019. Abortion incidence and service availability in the United States.https://www.guttmacher.org/report/abortion-incidence-service-availabilit...
-
- Myers C., Jones R.K., Upadhyay U.D. Predicted changes in abortion access and incidence in a post-Roe world. Contraception. 2019;100:367–373. - PubMed
-
- Penchansky R., Thomas J.W. The concept of access: definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction. Med Care. 1981;19:127–140. - PubMed
-
- Jones R.K., Upadhyay U.D., Weitz T.A. At what cost? Payment for abortion care by U.S. women. Women’s Health Issues. 2013;23:e173–e178. - PubMed
-
- Roberts S.C.M., Gould H., Kimport K., Weitz T.A., Foster D.G. Out-of-pocket costs and insurance coverage for abortion in the United States. Women’s Health Issues. 2014;24:e211–e218. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources