Show simple item record

Determinants of demand: Method selection and provider preference among United States women seeking abortion services.

dc.contributor.authorShochet, Tara P.
dc.contributor.advisorSnow, Rachel
dc.date.accessioned2016-08-30T16:23:15Z
dc.date.available2016-08-30T16:23:15Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.identifier.urihttp://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3287632
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/126968
dc.description.abstractAccess to abortion services in the United States has become increasingly constrained over the past decade. Medication abortion has the potential to increase abortion availability, primarily through new provider networks, but without a better understanding of how and why women make decisions regarding both their abortion method and provider, expansion efforts may be misguided and valuable resources wasted. An exploratory study was undertaken to investigate method and provider preferences. Semi-structured one-onone interviews were conducted with 205 abortion clients at Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa clinics. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses were carried out. Stigmatization of abortion is a driving force in how women make abortion-related decisions; this may help to explain why the majority of participants would not have wanted to obtain their abortion from their regular provider and many women were not even comfortable discussing the topic of abortion with them. Continuity with one's regular provider was not deemed important or desired by the majority of study participants. Two of the main reasons given for preferring the clinic over the private doctor were confidentiality and privacy; keeping the abortion a secret from one's parents was paramount for some of the younger participants. Study participants also discussed the lack of privacy in small town communities and related fears of confidential ities being breached as reasons for preferring the clinic setting. Travel time was not a predictor of preferring one's regular doctor over the clinic. Method selection was primarily based on process characteristics including duration of procedure or clinic visit, location (clinic vs. home), level of invasiveness, and pain. Many abortion clients feel strongly about their method of choice, and method preference was shown to trump any interest in one's regular doctor for the majority of women. Unexpectedly, participants who chose the aspiration procedure were more likely to have previous knowledge about the medication method than those choosing a medication abortion. Women at greater gestational age were more likely to choose aspiration over medication, even at 8 weeks or less. One quarter of participants claimed to have insurance that would cover abortion services, the vast majority of whom planned to use it.
dc.format.extent136 p.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoEN
dc.subjectAspiration Procedure
dc.subjectConfidentiality
dc.subjectDemand
dc.subjectDeterminants
dc.subjectMedication Abortion
dc.subjectMethod
dc.subjectPreference
dc.subjectProvider Networks
dc.subjectSeeking
dc.subjectSelection
dc.subjectServices
dc.subjectStates
dc.subjectUnited
dc.subjectWomen
dc.titleDeterminants of demand: Method selection and provider preference among United States women seeking abortion services.
dc.typeThesis
dc.description.thesisdegreenamePhDen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreedisciplineHealth and Environmental Sciences
dc.description.thesisdegreedisciplineObstetrics
dc.description.thesisdegreedisciplinePublic health
dc.description.thesisdegreegrantorUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/126968/2/3287632.pdf
dc.owningcollnameDissertations and Theses (Ph.D. and Master's)


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.