2018
DOI: 10.1080/14649365.2018.1509114
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trails and technology: social and cultural geographies of abortion access

Abstract: The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…'abortion corridors' arise between neighbouring countries with different legal regimes or similarly restrictive laws but different levels of enforcement: these corridors include Ireland-England, Germany-Poland, USA-Mexico, and Chile-Peru, among others (see Side 2016;Freeman 2017;Fletcher 2016;Brown 2013;Calkin and Freeman, 2018). Women who must travel for abortion face numerous barriers, of which political and economic obstacles often loom the largest.…”
Section: States Clinics and Reproductive Spacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…'abortion corridors' arise between neighbouring countries with different legal regimes or similarly restrictive laws but different levels of enforcement: these corridors include Ireland-England, Germany-Poland, USA-Mexico, and Chile-Peru, among others (see Side 2016;Freeman 2017;Fletcher 2016;Brown 2013;Calkin and Freeman, 2018). Women who must travel for abortion face numerous barriers, of which political and economic obstacles often loom the largest.…”
Section: States Clinics and Reproductive Spacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the absence of any policy constraints, and acting within the MToP regulatory environment, the training providers were able to be autonomous in making decisions about training others around MToP, so diluting power around where and by whom service delivery could be undertaken. This circumstance appears to be somewhat exceptional as challenges to the medical control of abortion tend to be controversial [ 41 , 42 ]. In other country or policy contexts where there is little desire to divest medical power there may also be fewer motivations to decentralise services like abortion.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whilst the challenges to decentralization identified in this study were few, they were significant in terms of creating caution amongst some study participants about MToP service delivery, and these remained unresolved throughout and beyond the training sessions. Abortion stigma in particular remains as a broader issue, recognised as a persistent barrier to improving abortion access [ 41 , 42 ]. Ultimately, it appears that it is not the number of enablers and challenges to decentralization in this case that are significant, but the gravity of each of these in terms of supporting or undermining the dimensions of decentralization.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Scholarly writing on AHAs has been careful to emphasise that these movements were made up of political activists working to disrupt the borders of reproductive governance (De Zordo, Mishtal and Anton, 2016; O’Donnell, 2017). This disruption has taken a variety of forms, including facilitating movement across spatial and socio-economic boundaries (Rossiter, 2009; Calkin and Freeman, 2018), supporting self-care (Drovetta, 2015; De Zordo, Mishtal and Anton, 2016; Aiken, Gomperts and Trussell, 2017; Kasstan and Crook, 2018) and normalising or ‘de-strangering’ abortion access (Fletcher, 2016).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%