Being forced to view an ultrasound doesn’t change women’s decisions about abortion

[cynatnite]

According to a comprehensive new study published in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology, the overwhelming majority of women who seek abortion care do not change their minds after receiving and viewing a sonogram.

Researchers reviewed nearly 16,000 visits to a provider where women were given the option to view their ultrasound image before going forward with an abortion. While a majority chose not to look, women did opt to view the sonogram a little over 40 percent of the time. Among the women who elected to view the image, 98.4 percent still went forward with the abortion. (Ninety nine percent of the women who did not view the ultrasound went forward with the procedure.)

The small number of women who viewed the image and changed their minds were part of the 7.4 percent of patients who had expressed low or medium certainty about their choice upfront. Meaning, they had mixed feelings about whether or not to go forward with the procedure from the start, their uncertainty wasn’t suddenly conjured by viewing the sonogram. Zero percent of women who expressed confidence in their medical decision were persuaded to change their minds after the ultrasound, because “such viewing does not alter decisions of the large majority of women who are certain that abortion is the right decision,” the researchers concluded.

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/10/being_forced_to_view_an_ultrasound_doesnt_change_womens_decisions_about_abortion/

[Lex]

1. Women already know they're pregnant

so I doubt they are surprised by the ultrasound.

[MissMillie]

2. While I will not argue with this study's findings

I don't necessarily think the point is to change minds.

I think the point is that many women will not be able to afford a sonogram, so if it's a condition of getting an abortion, it will make the procedure prohibitively expensive.

[athena]

6. Good point (n/t)

[bettyellen]

10. that and it will delay and add large costs to those who needed to travel for health care

something like 82-85% of all counties do not have abortion providers. They want to make these women's lives even more difficult.

[redqueen]

11. +1

[get the red out]

3. Of course not

Their life circumstances and personal needs haven't changed as a result of bullying and shaming, they are completely sentient no matter that Republicans would disagree that a women could have sentience.

[politicaljunkie41910]

4. It's an expense that they shouldn't have to incur to satisfy some rightwingnut's demands.

[herding cats]

5. Duh'

I'm pretty sure they've already weighed their options before they made the decision to go to the clinic for the procedure. Which was known before such invasive laws were passed. Having to be pseudo raped by a probe is just to add a layer of punishment to something religious fundamentalist consider to be a sin.

[uppityperson]

7. k&r and cross posting to Prochoice group. Here is the abstract to research article.

Glad to see they are doing research on this asinine piece of mandated bullshit.


http://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/Abstract/2014/01000/Relationship_Between_Ultrasound_Viewing_and.13.aspx

Collapse BoxAbstract
OBJECTIVE: Ultrasound scanning is a routine part of preprocedure abortion care, and many health care providers offer patients the opportunity to view their ultrasound images. It has been speculated that ultrasound viewing will dissuade women from having an abortion. We examine whether viewing the image is associated with choosing to continue the pregnancy.

METHODS: Data from medical records for 15,575 visits by women seeking abortion care at a large, urban abortion provider in 2011 were analyzed for factors associated with choosing to continue the pregnancy. All patients received a preprocedure ultrasound scan and were offered the opportunity to view the image.

RESULTS: Patients opted to view the ultrasound image 42.5% of the time. Nearly all pregnancies (98.8%) were terminated: 98.4% of pregnancies among women who viewed their ultrasound images and 99.0% of pregnancies among the patients who did not. Among women with high decision certainty, viewing was not associated with deciding to continue the pregnancy. Viewing was significantly associated with deciding to continue the pregnancy only among the 7.4% of women who reported medium or low decision certainty about having an abortion (adjusted odds ratio 3.21, 95% confidence interval 1.18–8.73).

CONCLUSION: Voluntarily viewing the ultrasound image may contribute to a small proportion of women with medium or low decision certainty deciding to continue the pregnancy; such viewing does not alter decisions of the large majority of women who are certain that abortion is the right decision.

[Gormy Cuss]

8. It's just another pointless waste of money designed to make abortions more difficult to obtain.

The study has a large n too -- I'll bet these results stand when replicated using data from other providers.

[freshwest]

9. Doing a search on the lack of abortion access is torture is flooded with anti-abortion links, but

Going further down in results, past Liberty University and other group websites, we find:

http://www.asafeworldforwomen.org/about/safe-world-blogs/gab-chaparro-blogs/3776-my-mother.html

There are still a few out there:

https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/shalev.htm

https://europeanprochoicenetwork.wordpress.com/tag/un/

That leads to this:

http://reproductiverights.org/en/press-room/un-committee-against-torture-ireland-must-ensure-access-to-lawful-abortion

A few more:

http://www.hhrjournal.org/2013/10/25/human-rights-versus-legal-control-over-womens-reproductive-self-determination/

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&reference=A7-2013-0426&language=EN

http://reproductiverights.org/en/feature/human-rights-day-2011

http://www.policymic.com/articles/30925/un-report-classifies-lack-of-access-to-abortion-as-torture

My favorites:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/09/1192866/-UN-official-Bans-on-abortion-amount-to-torture

https://godlessfeminist.wordpress.com/tag/un-convention-on-torture/

http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/4cad275a8b5509ed8025673800503f9d

http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/why-reproductive-rights-matter-open-society

http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/economics.html

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/07/01/2239101/abortion-contraception-budget/

Those may be useful in discussions with those on the other side. Because there are a lot of them:

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

What is happening now:

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/government-and-you/who-decides/

http://www.prochoicemass.org/

http://womensenews.org/story/reproductive-health/110801/un-agencies-duck-taking-stand-safe-abortion

http://www.wrrap.org/

Leave you with all of those.