Taking Insurance in Abortion Care: Policy, Practices, and the Role of Poverty

Kimport, Katrina; Rowland, Brenly

doi:10.1108/s0275-495920170000035003

Cited by 9 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this adjustment assumes that abortion pricing responds and adheres to the same market dynamics as other goods and services. Prior research suggests that this may not be the case ( Dennis, Blanchard, & Córdova, 2011 ; Kimport & Rowland, 2017 ). Although the survey attempted to identify all abortion-providing facilities, it is expected that some hospitals and physicians’ offices were not captured ( Jones & Jerman, 2017 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in Abortion Service Delivery in Hostile, Middle-ground, and Supportive States in 2014

Jones

Ingerick

Jerman

2018

Women's Health Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesIn 2013, the majority of women lived in states considered hostile to abortion rights, or states with numerous abortion restrictions. By comparison, 31% lived in supportive states. This study examined differences in abortion service delivery according to the policy climate in which clinics must operate.MethodsData come from the 2014 Abortion Provider Census, which contains information about all known abortion-providing facilities in the United States. In addition to number and type of facility, we examine several aspects of abortion care: provision of only early medication abortion (EMA-only) whether an advanced practice clinician provided abortions, gestational parameters, and average charge for procedure. All indicators were examined nationally and according to whether the clinic was in a state that was hostile, middle ground, or supportive of abortion rights.ResultsIn 2014, hostile and supportive states accounted for the same proportion of all U.S. abortions—44% (each) —although 57% of women age 15 to 44 lived in hostile states. Hostile states had one-half as many abortion-providing facilities as supportive ones. EMA-only facilities accounted for 37% of clinics in supportive states compared with 8% in hostile states. Sixty-five percent of clinics in supportive states reported that advanced practice clinicians provided abortion care, compared with 3% in hostile states. After cost of living adjustments, a first-trimester surgical abortion was most expensive in middle-ground states ($470) and least expensive in supportive states ($402).ConclusionsThe distribution of abortion services, the type of facility in which they are provided, and the amount a facility charges all vary according to the abortion policy climate.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in Abortion Service Delivery in Hostile, Middle-ground, and Supportive States in 2014

Jones

Ingerick

Jerman

2018

Women's Health Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 This disproportionately affected people of color who are more likely to rely on public insurance. 87 In parallel, most privately insured patients also paid out-of-pocket for care due to high deductibles, 88 confusion about whether there is coverage, 89 or concerns over privacy. 90 The economic consequences of whether abortion seekers can terminate their pregnancies are substantial.…”

Section: Abortion and The P Olitic Al Economymentioning

confidence: 99%

Abortion as a sociological case

Kimport,

Weitz

2024

Sociological Forum

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For over a century, abortion has been politically and socially contested, affecting people's lives through personal experience and/or public discourse. In the United States (US), abortion is sometimes exceptional—treated differently from other procedures, professions, and political issues—and sometimes an exemplar—an accessible example of a commonly occurring social, political, or personal phenomenon. It is, in other words, an excellent sociological case study. Yet the sociological literature on abortion is relatively thin. In this essay, we review research on abortion and opportunities for future sociological work in eight areas: gender; race; the body and embodiment; political economy; organizations, occupations, and work; medical sociology; law and society; and social movements. Sociologists have much to contribute to characterizing and understanding abortion, particularly following the 2022 US Supreme Court decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion. The discipline also has much to learn from studying abortion as a case. With its multifaceted social and political status and intersections with key areas of sociological interest, abortion offers a generative case for advancing sociological concepts, subfields, and constructs. While not exhaustive, our review aims to spark interest and inquiry, showcasing how a topic that spurs strong opinions can also catalyze sociological insights.

show abstract