Poster
Mena-Meléndez, L.; Bueno, X.; Cary, K.M.; Asamoah, N.A.; Crawford, B.; Turner, R.; Lo, W.J.; Jozkowski, K.N. (2024, October 27-October 30): Exploring People’s Perceptions of Common Abortion Circumstances Through Open-Ended Longitudinal Data. American Public Health Association (APHA) Annual Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.
For decades, the General Social Survey (GSS) has evaluated the US public’s abortion attitudes through six specific abortion circumstances. However, it is unknown whether GSS circumstances are representative of people’s actual perceptions of reasons for abortion. This study explored what US adults believe to be the three most common reasons why someone might seek abortion. We used open-ended data in English and Spanish from two waves of a longitudinal survey (n = 681 participants; n = 2,043 responses per wave; n = 4,086 total responses) collected in 2022 (before and after the Dobbs decision) via IPSOS’s KnowledgePanel®. We aimed to answer: (1) what are people’s perceptions of the most common reasons for abortion?; (2) are there differences in perceptions across language, gender, and age?; and (3) do perceptions differ before and after the Dobbs v. Jackson decision? Overall, the most commonly mentioned reasons people believe someone seeks abortion were: the pregnancy is “unwanted/unplanned,” the pregnancy is a result of “sexual violence” (e.g., rape, incest), and the abortion is needed for “medical” reasons. We observed the largest differences across language, compared with age, and the least across gender. After the Dobbs decision, we identified an increase in respondents mentioning “economic/financial” and “health-related” reasons, and a decrease related to “unwanted/unplanned” pregnancies and “lack of support or inability to provide care.” Assessing perceptions of abortion circumstances is most important post-Dobbs, as public opinion may influence state-level abortion legislation through elections and ballot initiatives, which may have implications for reproductive healthcare access.
Learning Outcomes (52 words)
• Evaluate US adults’ perceptions of the three most common reasons why someone might seek abortion
• Assess whether there are differences in perceptions of why someone might seek abortion across language, gender, and age
• Identify whether the Dobbs v. Jackson decision had any effect on people’s perceptions of why someone might seek abortion
Cary, K.M.; Lohrmann, C.; Layton, D.; Piaz, J.; Jozkowski, K.N.; Crawford, B.; Turner, R.; Lo, W.J. (2024, October 27-October 30): U.S. adults’ conceptualizations of abortion as a (non)essential procedure during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Public Health Association (APHA) Annual Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.
COVID-19 limited healthcare services to only those deemed “essential,” impacting access to abortion, as some states’ attorneys general classified abortion as non-essential, against recommendations from ACOG. In this study, we explore U.S. public’s opinions on abortion as an essential medical procedure during COVID-19. We collected data in English and Spanish via IPSOS’s KnowledgePanel® in four waves (Ns=576-919) from September 2020 to January 2021. We asked, “Do you think abortion is an essential medical procedure?” (yes, no, unsure) and, “Please describe why you think/do not think/are unsure abortion is an essential medical procedure” (open-ended). Our sample comprised 1523 closed-ended and corresponding open-ended responses. Four coders engaged in an iterative qualitative coding process to analyze open-ended responses. Of participants, 45.8% believed abortion was an essential procedure, 31.7% believed it was not, and 22.5% were unsure. The most prevalent coding theme was “Abortion is essential,” comprising the codes: abortion is time-sensitive, abortion is essential healthcare, abortion is a right, and abortion prevents suffering. The second most prevalent theme was “Essentiality depends,” comprising: depends on the reason, essential if rape/incest, and essential if medically necessary. The third most prevalent theme was “Abortion is not essential,” comprising: abortion is elective, abortion is wrong/murder, other procedures take precedent, and abortion alternatives. We noted within-person discrepancies, such as participants indicating “no” to the closed-ended item but providing open-ended responses that were oriented toward reasons to consider abortion essential. Findings highlight the nuance required to capture complex attitudes with survey items, especially in relation to abortion as healthcare.
Oral
Mena-Meléndez, L.; Hawbaker, A.; Greer, K.; Crawford, B.; Turner, R.; Lo, W.J.; Jozkowski, K.N. (2024, October 27-October 30): People’s Attitudes Regarding the Earliest Point in Pregnancy the Government Should Prohibit Abortion. American Public Health Association (APHA) Annual Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.
Post-Dobbs v. Jackson, many states have restricted or banned abortion (or are likely to do so) with very limited exceptions based on gestational age or fetal development markers. We analyzed US adults’ attitudes toward government-enforced abortion restrictions based on six gestational and fetal time points (e.g., when sperm and egg join, when fetal heartbeat can be detected, viability) and a seventh option—the government should never be able to prohibit abortion. We used open-ended data from an online survey we administered in 2020 using Growth from Knowledge (GfK) to English- (n=1094) and Spanish-speaking (n=489) respondents. We aimed to answer: (1) what is the earliest point in a pregnancy that people think the government should prohibit abortion?; (2) why do people think this should be the earliest point?; (3) are there differences across survey language? Preliminary findings indicate that people most commonly indicated the government should be able to prohibit abortion: never (24%), “when a fetal heartbeat can be detected” (23%), or “when a sperm and egg join” (17%). A greater proportion of English-speakers indicated that gestational development markers should be used to determine abortion legality (36.1% v. 30.2%) whereas more Spanish-speakers indicated that at the time point they selected, a “life or a human exists” (36.8% v. 43.2%) as a rationale. Assessing public attitudes regarding government restrictions and protections for abortion is imperative in a post-Dobbs landscape since public opinion may influence state-level abortion legislation through elections and ballot initiatives, which, in turn, shapes reproductive healthcare and abortion access.
Learning Outcomes (52 words)
• Evaluate US adults’ perceptions of the earliest point in a pregnancy that the government should prohibit abortion
• Assess why people think this should be the earliest point in a pregnancy that the government should prohibit abortion
• Identify whether there are differences in people’s perceptions across the language of survey administration