Attitudes toward abortion, social welfare programs, and gender roles in the U.S. and South Africa.
Attitudes toward abortion, social welfare programs, and gender roles in the U.S. and South Africa.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/09581596.2019.1601683
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Schulz AJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mosley EA;Anderson BA;Harris LH;Fleming PJ;Schulz AJ
Public abortion attitudes are important predictors of abortion stigma and accessibility, even in legal settings like the U.S. and South Africa. With data from the U.S. General Social Survey and South African Social Attitudes Survey, we used ordinal logistic regressions to measure whether abortion acceptability (in cases of poverty and fetal anomaly) is related to attitudes about social welfare programs and gender roles, then assessed differences by race/ethnicity and education. Social welfare program attitudes did not correlate with abortion acceptability in the U.S., but in South Africa, greater support for income equalization (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.41–0.85) and increased government spending on the poor (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49–0.91) correlated with lower abortion acceptability in circumstances of poverty. This was significant for Black African and higher educated South Africans. In the U.S., egalitarian gender role attitudes correlated with higher acceptability of abortion in circumstances of poverty (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.03–1.36) and fetal anomaly (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.01–1.31). This was significant for White and less educated Americans. In South Africa, egalitarian gender role attitudes correlated with higher abortion acceptability for fetal anomaly (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.01–1.25) overall and among Black and less educated respondents, but among non-Black South Africans they correlated with higher abortion acceptability in circumstances of poverty. These results suggest abortion attitudes are distinctly related to socioeconomic and gender ideology depending one’s national context, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Reducing abortion stigma will require community-based approaches rooted in intersectional reproductive justice frameworks.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Barkan, Steven E.
通讯作者：
Barkan, Steven E.
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Baker, Peter A.
通讯作者：
Baker, Peter A.
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Altshuler, Anna L.;Storey, Helen L. Gems;Prager, Sarah W.
通讯作者：
Prager, Sarah W.
影响因子：
5.4
作者：
Harris, Lisa Hope;Debbink, Michelle;Hassinger, Jane
通讯作者：
Hassinger, Jane
影响因子：
168.9
作者：
Coovadia, Hoosen;Jewkes, Rachel;McIntyre, Diane
通讯作者：
McIntyre, Diane