“I felt like I was a bad person… which I’m not”: Stigmatization in crisis pregnancy centers

Warren, Evangeline; Kissling, Alexandra; Norris, Alison; Gursahaney, Priya R.; Bessett, Danielle; Gallo, Maria

doi:10.1016/j.ssmqr.2022.100059

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Healthcare staff also described how patients would come into the clinic crying because they were upset by the stigmatizing language the CPC staff would use with them. Many CPCs lure in pregnant people under the guise of providing pregnancy options counseling, yet they operate to deter individuals from obtaining an abortion (Warren et al., 2022).…”

Section: Hidden Bureaucratic Violence and The Promotion Of Crisis Pre...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproductive gerrymandering, bureaucratic violence, and the erosion of abortion access in the United States

Basmajian

2024

Med Anthropol Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the contemporary American political landscape, gerrymandering and the passage of anti‐abortion legislation are intimately connected in what I call reproductive gerrymandering. I develop this concept as an analytic tool to understand the disjuncture between the passage of laws restricting reproductive healthcare access and the will of the majority of voters. In this ethnographic project, Ohio serves as an important case study where efforts to elect a supermajority of extremist anti‐abortion Republican officials has allowed for the passage of unpopular legislation restricting abortion. I argue that the mundane bureaucratic processes involved in electoral redistricting and state budget procedures are forms of bureaucratic violence that result in structural harm experienced by pregnant people, especially those who are most marginalized. Reproductive gerrymandering provides a means for theorizing the connections across domains involving partisan redistricting, reproductive governance in the form of anti‐abortion legislation, and the structural violence experienced by pregnant people seeking abortion.

show abstract

Section: Hidden Bureaucratic Violence and The Promotion Of Crisis Pre...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproductive gerrymandering, bureaucratic violence, and the erosion of abortion access in the United States

Basmajian

2024

Med Anthropol Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet among pregnant people considering abortion, those who visit a center are significantly more likely to be pregnant four weeks later than those who do not visit a center (Cartwright et al 2021). Staff overemphasize abortion risks and stigma while lauding parenting (Hutchens 2021; Kimport 2019; Warren et al 2022). This counsel interacts with clients’ preexisting beliefs about abortion in ways that can reproduce, mitigate, or resist abortion stigma (Kimport 2019; Warren et al 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Staff overemphasize abortion risks and stigma while lauding parenting (Hutchens 2021; Kimport 2019; Warren et al 2022). This counsel interacts with clients’ preexisting beliefs about abortion in ways that can reproduce, mitigate, or resist abortion stigma (Kimport 2019; Warren et al 2022). When entwined with sonograms, the counsel at centers can evoke in clients an embodied experience that shapes their emotions around pregnancy, their decision, and themselves (Hutchens 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“It Wasn’t Very Public-Clinicy”: Client Experiences at Faith-Based Pregnancy Centers

Hutchens

2023

J Health Soc Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Faith-based pregnancy centers strive to offer “alternatives to abortion” that supporters claim aid women and critics assert manipulate pregnant people, stigmatize abortion, and potentially delay clients from obtaining medical care. However, scholars know little about the exchanges within appointments and how clients make sense of these experiences. Drawing on ethnographic observations of client appointments in two pregnancy centers in the West and 29 in-depth interviews with clients, this article uses an intersectional framework to analyze client experiences. Clients favorably compared centers to clinical health care providers, emphasizing the unexpectedly attentive emotional care they received. These evaluations stem from clients’ reproductive histories, which are shaped by gender, racism, and economic inequalities that configure their access to and interactions within the health system. Emotional care serves to create and maintain pregnancy centers’ impression of legitimacy among clients.

show abstract

Spatial Analyses of Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Abortion Facilities in the United States, 2021 (Pre-Dobbs): Cross-Sectional Study

Swartzendruber,

Luisi,

Johnson

et al. 2024

JMIR Public Health Surveill

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) are religious non-profit organizations that have a primary mission of diverting people from having abortions. For decades, one tactic used by CPCs has been to locate near abortion facilities. Despite medical groups' warnings that CPCs do not adhere to medical and ethical standards and pose risks to individual and public health, government support for CPCs has significantly increased over the past decade.Objective: This study aimed to map CPCs, abortion facilities, and geographic areas in the United States (US) categorized into four zones defined by their proximity to CPCs and abortion facilities in 2021. We also sought to describe the number and percentage of reproductive-aged women living in each zone and the proximity of CPCs to abortion facilities. Methods:Using 2021 data from CPC Map and the Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) Abortion Facility Database, we determined the ratio of CPCs to abortion facilities. Using these sources and Census data, we categorized and mapped US block groups into four distinct zones based on the locations of block group centroids within 15-mile radii of CPCs and abortion facilities: 1) no presence, 2) CPC only, 3) abortion facility only, and 4) dual presence. We used summary statistics to calculate the number and percentage of block groups and reproductive-aged (15-49 years) women living in each zone. We also calculated distances and drive times from abortion facilities to the nearest CPC. All analyses were conducted nationally and by region, division, and state. We used chi-square statistics to test for differences by region and division in the number of block groups and women classified to each zone.Results: Nationally, the ratio of CPCs to abortion facilities was 3.4, and 55% of block groups were categorized in the "dual presence" zone, 27% as "CPC only," and 0.8% in the "abortion facility only" zone. Most (60%) reproductive-aged women lived in a "dual presence" zone, 26% in a "CPC only", and 0.8% lived in an "abortion facility only" zone. We detected statistically significant variations (p<0.001) in the number of block groups and women classified as living in each zone by region and division. Nationally, the median distance from abortion facilities to the nearest CPC was 2 miles, and the median drive time was 5.5 minutes. Minimum drive times were <1 minute in all but 11 states. Conclusions:The findings suggest that CPCs' tactic of locating near abortion facilities was largely realized before the 2022 US Supreme Court decision that overturned the federal right to abortion. Research on CPCs' locations and tactics should continue given the dynamic abortion policy landscape and risks posed by CPCs. Tailored programming to raise awareness about CPCs and help people identify and access safe sources of healthcare may mitigate harm.

show abstract

“I felt like I was a bad person… which I’m not”: Stigmatization in crisis pregnancy centers

Cited by 3 publications

References 28 publications

Reproductive gerrymandering, bureaucratic violence, and the erosion of abortion access in the United States

Reproductive gerrymandering, bureaucratic violence, and the erosion of abortion access in the United States

“It Wasn’t Very Public-Clinicy”: Client Experiences at Faith-Based Pregnancy Centers

Spatial Analyses of Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Abortion Facilities in the United States, 2021 (Pre-Dobbs): Cross-Sectional Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About