Public funding for abortion where broadly legal
Public funding for abortion where broadly legal
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.contraception.2016.06.019
复制
发表时间：
2016-11-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Burns, Bridgit
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Grossman, Daniel;Grindlay, Kate;Burns, Bridgit
目的：本研究的目的是调查拥有自由或自由解释法律的国家的堕胎公共资助政策(定义为允许出于经济或社会原因或根据要求堕胎)。研究设计：在2011年5月、2012年2月和2013年6月、2014年12月，我们研究了在线资源，并在生殖健康专家中进行了一项基于电子邮件的调查，以确定各国的堕胎公共资助政策。我们将国家归类为：为堕胎提供全额资助(在政府机构免费提供，由国家资助的医疗保险覆盖)；部分资助(部分由政府覆盖，根据收入或非收入标准为某些人群提供覆盖，或在公共设施中费用较低)；为特殊情况(强奸/乱伦/胎儿损伤、妇女的健康/生活或其他有限情况)提供资金，以及不提供公共资金。结果：我们获得了符合纳入标准的所有80个国家的数据。在拥有自由/自由解释堕胎法的国家的15-49岁世界女性人口中，46%的人生活在为堕胎提供全额资助的国家(34个国家)，41%的人生活在部分资助的国家(25个国家)，13%的人生活在没有资助或仅为特殊情况提供资助的国家(21个国家)。40个高收入国家中有31个为堕胎提供了全额资助(n=20)或部分资助(n=11)；40个中低收入国家中有28个为堕胎提供了全额(n=14)或部分资助(n=14)。在那些没有为堕胎提供公共资金的国家中，大多数国家提供了全面的产妇保健。结论：近一半拥有自由/自由解释堕胎法的国家为堕胎提供公共资金，包括过去20年来大多数放开堕胎法的国家。然而，异常值仍然存在，包括在发达国家，由于负担能力的原因，堕胎的机会可能受到限制。影响：由于服务成本影响获得，应监测有关公共服务供资的国家政策，宣传应优先确保低收入妇女能够负担得起护理。(C)2016 Elsevier Inc.保留所有权利。
Objective: The objective was to investigate public funding policies for abortion in countries with liberal or liberally interpreted laws (defined as permitting abortion for economic or social reasons or upon request).Study design: In May 2011 February 2012 and June 2013 December 2014, we researched online resources and conducted an email-based survey among reproductive health experts to determine countries' public funding policies for abortion. We categorized countries as follows: full funding for abortion (provided for free at government facilities, covered under state-funded health insurance); partial funding (partially covered by the government, covered for certain populations based on income or nonincome criteria, or less expensive in public facilities); funding for exceptional cases (rape/incest/fetal impairment, health/life of the woman or other limited cases) and no public funding.Results: We obtained data for all 80 countries meeting inclusion criteria. Among the world's female population aged 15-49 in countries with liberal/liberally interpreted abortion laws, 46% lived in countries with full funding for abortion (34 countries), 41% lived in countries with partial funding (25 countries), and 13% lived in countries with no funding or funding for exceptional cases only (21 countries). Thirty-one of 40 high-income countries provided full funding for abortion (n=20) or partial funding (n=11); 28 of 40 low- to middle-income countries provided full (n=14) or partial funding for abortion (n=14). Of those countries that did not provide public funding for abortion, most provided full coverage of maternity care.Conclusion: Nearly half of countries with liberal/liberally interpreted abortion laws had public funding for abortion, including most countries that liberalized their abortion law in the past 20 years. Outliers remain, however, including among developed countries where access to abortion may be limited due to affordability.Implications: Since cost of services affects access, country policies regarding public funding for services should be monitored, and advocacy should prioritize ensuring the affordability of care for low-income women. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.