IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v315y2022ics027795362200853x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“They're forcing people to have children that they can't afford”: a qualitative study of social support and capital among individuals receiving an abortion in Georgia

Author

Listed:
  • Dickey, Madison S.
  • Mosley, Elizabeth A.
  • Clark, Elizabeth A.
  • Cordes, Sarah
  • Lathrop, Eva
  • Haddad, Lisa B.

Abstract

Abortion is common but highly stigmatized in the United States, and the overturning of Roe v. Wade severely restricted abortion access in many states across the nation. Data reveal that maternal morbidity and mortality are already increasing, and research suggests existing inequities in abortion access across racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups will be exacerbated. Research has shown that social support (perceived and received aid from one's social network) and social capital (resources accessed through those social connections) can improve access to health services and decrease barriers to care. Given the escalating barriers to abortion, including longer travel distances, it is imperative to better understand the roles of social support and social capital within abortion access, especially for people living on lower incomes and people of color. Our team conducted in-depth interviews with post-abortion patients (n = 18) from an urban abortion clinic in Georgia in 2019 and 2020, shortly after a six-week gestational age abortion limit had been passed but before it was enacted. We examined how people described their social support and social capital – or lack thereof – when making decisions about their pregnancy and their ability to access abortion. We found that social support and social capital – economic support in particular – were key facilitators of both abortion access and parenting, but participants often experienced barriers to economic support within their social networks due to poverty, unstable partnerships, structural inequality, and abortion stigma. Women experienced constraints to their reproductive autonomy, wherein they had no alternatives but abortion. Our findings suggest that increased economic support and de-stigmatization of abortion are needed to improve reproductive autonomy. Our findings also indicate that restricting and outlawing abortion services is significantly detrimental to the well-being of pregnant people, their families and networks, and their communities by perpetuating cycles of poverty and deepening socioeconomic and racial/ethnic inequities.

Suggested Citation

  • Dickey, Madison S. & Mosley, Elizabeth A. & Clark, Elizabeth A. & Cordes, Sarah & Lathrop, Eva & Haddad, Lisa B., 2022. "“They're forcing people to have children that they can't afford”: a qualitative study of social support and capital among individuals receiving an abortion in Georgia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:315:y:2022:i:c:s027795362200853x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115547
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795362200853X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115547?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Whitney S. Rice & Katie Labgold & Quita Tinsley Peterson & Megan Higdon & Oriaku Njoku, 2021. "Sociodemographic and Service Use Characteristics of Abortion Fund Cases from Six States in the U.S. Southeast," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-16, April.
    2. Foster, D.G. & Biggs, M.A. & Ralph, L. & Gerdts, C. & Roberts, S. & Glymour, M.M., 2018. "Socioeconomic outcomes of women who receive and women who are denied wanted abortions in the United States," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 108(3), pages 407-413.
    3. Jones, R.K. & Jerman, J., 2017. "Population group abortion rates and lifetime incidence of abortion: United States, 2008–2014," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 107(12), pages 1904-1909.
    4. Dehlendorf, C. & Harris, L.H. & Weitz, T.A., 2013. "Disparities in abortion rates: A public health approach," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 103(10), pages 1772-1779.
    5. Katherine Scrivens & Conal Smith, 2013. "Four Interpretations of Social Capital: An Agenda for Measurement," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2013/6, OECD Publishing.
    6. Upadhyay, U.D. & Weitz, T.A. & Jones, R.K. & Barar, R.E. & Foster, D.G., 2014. "Denial of abortion because of provider gestational age limits in the United States," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 104(9), pages 1687-1694.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sarah C M Roberts & Nancy F Berglas & Katrina Kimport, 2020. "Complex situations: Economic insecurity, mental health, and substance use among pregnant women who consider – but do not have – abortions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Pleasants, Elizabeth & Parham, Lindsay & Weidert, Karen & Anderson, Emma & Dolgins, Eliza & Prata, Ndola & Upadhyay, Ushma D. & Marshall, Cassondra, 2024. "Waiting to start abortion: A qualitative exploration of narratives of waiting shared in a Reddit community for abortion post-Dobbs leak in 2022," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 349(C).
    3. Sarah Miller & Laura R. Wherry & Diana Greene Foster, 2023. "The Economic Consequences of Being Denied an Abortion," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 394-437, February.
    4. Rocca, Corinne H. & Moseson, Heidi & Gould, Heather & Foster, Diana G. & Kimport, Katrina, 2021. "Emotions over five years after denial of abortion in the United States: Contextualizing the effects of abortion denial on women's health and lives," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 269(C).
    5. Barış Alpaslan & Julide Yildirim, 2020. "The Missing Link: Are Individuals with More Social Capital in Better Health? Evidence from India," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 811-834, August.
    6. Leonardo Becchetti & Emanuele Bobbio & Federico Prizia & Lorenzo Semplici, 2022. "Going Deeper into the S of ESG: A Relational Approach to the Definition of Social Responsibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.
    7. Karl V. Lins & Henri Servaes & Ane Tamayo, 2017. "Social Capital, Trust, and Firm Performance: The Value of Corporate Social Responsibility during the Financial Crisis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 72(4), pages 1785-1824, August.
    8. Isabel Neira & Fernando Bruna & Marta Portela & Adela García-Aracil, 2018. "Individual Well-Being, Geographical Heterogeneity and Social Capital," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 1067-1090, April.
    9. Caterina Muratori, 2021. "The Impact of Abortion Access on Violence Against Women," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2021-03, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    10. Whitney S. Rice & Katie Labgold & Quita Tinsley Peterson & Megan Higdon & Oriaku Njoku, 2021. "Sociodemographic and Service Use Characteristics of Abortion Fund Cases from Six States in the U.S. Southeast," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-16, April.
    11. Haroon Sseguya & Robert E. Mazur & Cornelia B. Flora, 2018. "Social capital dimensions in household food security interventions: implications for rural Uganda," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(1), pages 117-129, March.
    12. Lindo, Jason M. & Pineda-Torres, Mayra, 2021. "New Evidence on the Effects of Mandatory Waiting Periods for Abortion," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    13. Jens Ruhose & Stephan L. Thomsen & Insa Weilage, 2018. "The Wider Benefits of Adult Learning: Work-Related Training and Social Capital," CESifo Working Paper Series 7268, CESifo.
    14. O'Doherty, M.G. & French, D. & Steptoe, A. & Kee, F., 2017. "Social capital, deprivation and self-rated health: Does reporting heterogeneity play a role? Results from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 191-200.
    15. YODO Masato & YANO Makoto, 2017. "Household Income and the OECD's Four Types of Social Capital," Discussion papers 17119, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    16. Zandberg, Jonathan, 2021. "Family comes first: Reproductive health and the gender gap in entrepreneurship," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(3), pages 838-864.
    17. Bartolini, Stefano & Sarracino, Francesco & Slater, Giulia, 2020. "Do epidemics impose a trade-off between freedom and health? Evidence from Europe during Covid-19," MPRA Paper 105035, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Hailemariam, Abebe & Sakutukwa, Tutsirai & Yew, Siew Ling, 2021. "The impact of energy poverty on physical violence," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    19. Gioacchino Fazio & Francesca Giambona & Erasmo Vassallo & Elli Vassiliadis, 2018. "A Measure of Trust: The Italian Regional Divide in a Latent Class Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 209-242, November.
    20. Na Wang & Debra K. Creedy & Mingna Zhang & Hong Lu & Elizabeth Elder & Jyai Allen & Li Guo & Qian Xiao & Jenny Gamble, 2022. "Designing a Needs-Oriented Psychological Intervention for Chinese Women Undergoing an Abortion," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:315:y:2022:i:c:s027795362200853x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.