The impact of reduced abortion access on minor adolescents
Abortion is a safe and essential component of comprehensive sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care. Following the United States Supreme Court ruling in June 2022 that struck down Roe v. Wade, the movement to restrict abortion access in many states will severely limit reproductive freedom for pregnancy-capable people1. Individuals and communities, particularly those marginalized because of race/ethnicity, gender identity, income inequality, immigration status, and/or age, face barriers to reproductive health equity, and these policy changes exacerbate an already unjust reproductive healthcare landscape2. This paper highlights abortion access barriers specific to minor adolescents (those under age 18) and proposes strategic responses adolescent health care communities can enact.
The Society of Adolescent Health and Medicine and six other organizations stated opposition to restrictions on the reproductive rights and care of adolescents and young adults, including access to abortion3,4. These statements recognize abortion as a basic human right and fundamental to adolescent SRH. They call to normalize abortion as an essential component of comprehensive SRH care, educate policymakers on adolescent developmental capacity to make safe and informed reproductive health decisions, and advocate for improved access to adolescent contraception, sexual health education, and structural initiatives to promote opportunity and health equity among marginalized adolescents.
Those who provide health care for minor adolescents must understand the great impact restricted abortion access will have on minors and provide strategic responses. Although pregnancy and birth rates declined over the past 30 years, adolescents ages 19 and under (the standard age range reported by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) account for approximately 9% of individuals who obtain abortions. While these numbers represent a minority of those seeking abortions, this translates into at least 50,000 adolescents ages 19 and under needing abortion services annually, with some estimates being nearly double that5,6. Adolescents have the highest abortion ratio of any age group (851 per 1,000 live births for those under 15 years of age and 332 per 1,000 live births for 15–19 year-olds compared to 260 per 1,000 live births for 20–24 year-olds). When adolescents do not have access to comprehensive reproductive care, unmet needs lead to negative health and social consequences that may persist across the life course.
Current barriers to abortion access among minor adolescents
Minor adolescents face significant barriers to abortion care due to travel challenges, financial constraints, limited access to medication abortion, and parental notification and consent requirements limiting confidentiality2. While most adolescents have developmental capacity to make independent health care decisions7, they may have less experience navigating reproductive healthcare decisions than older individuals, potentially needing tailored education and resources when seeking abortion.
Travel challenges resulting in delayed care
Without federal protections to abortion, state-specific restrictions will necessitate people in need of abortion to either travel to other states, self-manage in their own states and face potential legal risks for doing so, or remain pregnant. Minors may face practical and legal barriers to travel for abortion access while maintaining confidentiality. Supportive adults who accompany minors across state lines may be unsure of their legal risk, which could further isolate minor adolescents from their support networks. This is particularly problematic as adolescents are more likely to have later gestation abortions, and restrictions will cause further delays8. While abortion is safer than childbirth, later gestation abortions entail more medical risks and are more difficult to obtain because of higher expenses and fewer experienced clinicians.
Cost barriers and limited access to telehealth
Adolescents face greater costs of care9,10, particularly if they lack confidential insurance coverage. Requirements for diagnostic tests like ultrasound, abortion procedures, medications, missed school or employment, and other costs may be prohibitive. Many abortion telemedicine programs are restricted to those 18 and older. Another barrier is online payment infrastructure, as minors are not allowed to use some of the common online payment services.
Parental consent and notification laws
Major medical organizations have historically opposed laws mandating parental involvement in minors’ abortion decisions11. Yet, 36 states currently require parental notification or consent before a minor can access abortion services12. Adolescents’ fear of disclosure around reproductive healthcare may delay their care2,13,14 While most minor adolescents make decisions with support from a parent or other trusted adult15 this support is not always available, and narrowly defined laws often ignore non-parent/guardian supportive adults.
Minors may pursue judicial bypass to obtain an abortion without parental involvement, but this is a complex and time-consuming process. It is often psychologically traumatic for adolescents to disclose deeply personal information to strangers in court, and it relies upon the decision of a judge who may lack expertise in medicine or adolescent development14,16.
Strategic responses in support of minor adolescents
In elevating the unique needs of youth, adolescent health professionals must apply principles of reproductive justice, the basic human right to maintain personal bodily autonomy, to have children, to not have children, and to parent one’s children in safe and supportive communities17. A recent commentary recommended a series of reproductive-justice informed advocacy actions for adolescent health professionals in light of Texas Senate Bill 82. Changes to abortion access will unfold dynamically with state-specific variability. Partnering with local and national professional communities and advocacy groups will enable awareness and responsiveness to evolving reproductive health needs of adolescents. Table 1 provides specific strategies and resources.
Table 1.
Barriers specific to minor adolescent abortion access with select approaches and resources
Barrier specific to minor adolescents | Example approach | Resources and organizations (hyperlinks included) |
---|---|---|
Need for youth-specific education and clinical support |
|
Advocates for Youth Amaze.org American Academy of Pediatrics ARSHEP curriculum Bright Futures Planned Parenthood Power to Decide SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change |
Travel challenges |
|
Abortion finder
Center for Reproductive Rights National Abortion Federation If/When/How Plan C Regulatory Assistance for Abortion Providers |
Cost barriers and limited access to telehealth |
|
Center for Reproductive Rights
National Network of Abortion Funds Reproductive Health Access Project |
Parental consent and notification laws |
|
Guttmacher Institute
Repro Legal Help National Abortion Federation Hotline NARAL Pro Choice America |
Individual, community, and national efforts are needed
On the individual level, healthcare professionals, parents/guardians, and youth advocates can promote thoughtful, shared decision making about reproductive health including frequent opportunities to discuss healthy relationships, pregnancy intentions, contraceptive needs and preferences, and specific local abortion policies and access considerations with young people. On a community level, we can eliminate barriers to and promote comprehensive, accurate sexual health education and promote youth friendly SRH services. On a national level, we can advocate for health systems, researchers, funding agencies, and policy communities to examine specific impacts of restricted abortion access on youth and form strategic partnerships between clinicians, advocates, operational leaders, and policymakers who understand adolescent development and the health and social prerogative of protecting abortion access for all.
Acknowledgements:
Dr. Hoopes was supported by grant number K12HS026369 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Dr. Maslowsky was supported by grant number K01HD091416 from Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
References
- 1.Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 (Supreme Court of the United States, 2022). [Google Scholar]
- 2.Bryson AE, Hassan A, Goldberg J, Moayedi G, Koyama A. Call to Action: Healthcare Providers Must Speak Up for Adolescent Abortion Access. J Adolesc Health. Feb 2022;70(2):189–191. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2021.11.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.SAHM News. Statement on Dobbs v. Jackson. Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine; 2022. https://www.adolescenthealth.org/SAHM-News/Consensus-Statement_Dobbs
- 4.SAHM News. SAHM/NASPAG Statement on leaked draft SCOTUS opinion regarding Mississippi v. Jackson Women’s Health. Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine; 2022. https://www.adolescenthealth.org/SAHM-News/SAHM-NASPAG-Statement-on-leaked-draft-SCOTUS-o-(2).aspx [DOI] [PubMed]
- 5.Kortsmit K, Mandel MG, Reeves JA, et al. Abortion Surveillance - United States, 2019. MMWR Surveill Summ. Nov 26 2021;70(9):1–29. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.ss7009a1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Jerman J, Jones RK, Onda T. Characteristics of U.S. Abortion Patients in 2014 and Changes Since 2008, New York: Guttmacher Institute. 2016. https://www.guttmacher.org/report/characteristics-us-abortion-patients-2014
- 7.Baltag V, Takeuchi Y, Guthold R, Ambresin AE. Assessing and Supporting Adolescents’ Capacity for Autonomous Decision-Making in Health-Care Settings: New Guidance From the World Health Organization. J Adolesc Health. Jul 2022;71(1):10–13. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2022.04.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Upadhyay UD, Weitz TA, Jones RK, Barar RE, Foster DG. Denial of abortion because of provider gestational age limits in the United States. Am J Public Health. Sep 2014;104(9):1687–94. doi: 10.2105/ajph.2013.301378 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Ely GE, Hales TW, Jackson DL, Kotting J, Agbemenu K. Access to choice: Examining differences between adolescent and adult abortion fund service recipients. Health Soc Care Community. Apr 23 2018;26(5):695–704. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12582 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Leyser-Whalen O, Torres L, Gonzales B. Revealing Economic and Racial Injustices: Demographics of Abortion Fund Callers on the U.S.-Mexico Border. Womens Reprod Health (Phila). 2021;8(3):188–202. doi: 10.1080/23293691.2021.1973845 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Burke PJ, Coles MS, Di Meglio G, et al. Sexual and reproductive health care: a position paper of the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. J Adolesc Health. Apr 2014;54(4):491–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.01.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Guttmacher Institute. Parental Involvement in Minors’ Abortion. August 1, 2022. Available at: https://www.guttmacher.org/print/state-policy/explore/parental-involvement-minors-abortions. Accessed August 9, 2022
- 13.Davis AR, Beasley AD. Abortion in adolescents: epidemiology, confidentiality, and methods. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. Oct 2009;21(5):390–5. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283307b84 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Braverman PK, Adelman WP, Alderman EM, et al. The Adolescent’s Right to Confidential Care When Considering Abortion. Pediatrics. 2017;139(2)doi: 10.1542/peds.2016-3861 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Resnick MD, Bearinger LH, Stark P, Blum RW. Patterns of consultation among adolescent minors obtaining an abortion. Am J Orthopsychiatry. Apr 1994;64(2):310–6. doi: 10.1037/h0079523 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Coleman-Minahan K, Stevenson AJ, Obront E, Hays S. Young Women’s Experiences Obtaining Judicial Bypass for Abortion in Texas. J Adolesc Health. Jan 2019;64(1):20–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.07.017 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective. Reproductive Justice. 2022. https://www.sistersong.net/reproductive-justice [Google Scholar]