Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Dec;49(6):913-918.
doi: 10.1177/10901981221125399. Epub 2022 Sep 29.

"Post- Roe" Abortion Policy Context Heightens the Imperative for Multilevel, Comprehensive, Integrated Health Education

Whitney S Rice  1 , Subasri Narasimhan  1 , Anna Newton-Levinson  1 , Johanna Pringle  1 , Sara K Redd  1 , Dabney P Evans  1
Affiliations

"Post- Roe" Abortion Policy Context Heightens the Imperative for Multilevel, Comprehensive, Integrated Health Education

Whitney S Rice et al. Health Educ Behav. 2022 Dec.

Abstract

The exceptionalism of abortion in public health education, due to social stigma, politicization, and lack of training, contributes to misinformation, policies unjustified by rigorous science, lack of access to person-centered health care, and systemic pregnancy-related inequities. Now that abortion access has vanished for large portions of the United States, following the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (JWHO), health educators must work to eliminate abortion-related silos, destigmatize abortion education, and bring comprehensive sexual and reproductive health information and evidence to the many audiences that will require it. We discuss consequences of abortion exceptionalism in health education for the public, health care providers, pregnant people, and health professionals in training-and opportunities to better and more accessibly provide sexual and reproductive health education to these audiences.

Keywords: comprehensive health education; evidence-based practice; family planning; health care disparities; pregnancy; stigma.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

    1. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 612: Abortion Training and Education. (2014). Obstetrics & Gynecology, 124(5), 1055–1059. 10.1097/01.AOG.0000456327.96480.18 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Atkins D. N., Bradford W. D. (2021). The effect of state-level sex education policies on youth sexual behaviors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 50(6), 2321–2333. 10.1007/s10508-020-01867-9 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brief for American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists et al. as Amicus Curiae Supporting Respondents, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (U.S. Supreme Court). (2022). https://www.acog.org/-/media/project/acog/acogorg/files/advocacy/amicus-...
    1. Britton L. E., Mercier R. J., Buchbinder M., Bryant A. G. (2017). Abortion providers, professional identity, and restrictive laws: A qualitative study. Health Care for Women International, 38(3), 222–237. 10.1080/07399332.2016.1254218 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chowdhary P., Newton-Levinson A., Rochat R. (2022). “No one does this for the money or lifestyle”: Abortion providers’ perspectives on factors affecting workforce recruitment and retention in the Southern United States. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 26(6), 1350–1357. 10.1007/s10995-021-03338-6 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types