Long-Acting but Reversible: Opportunities to Address Provider Bias in Contraceptive Care

Abstract

Jasmine is an 18-year-old Black female bringing her infant to the pediatrician for a newborn weight check. She asks her pediatrician’s opinion about hormonal contraceptive injections, sharing that they were strongly recommended after she gave birth. The recommending health care provider told her, “We don’t want you to end up back here any time soon.” Rosita, a 16-year-old Latina female, visits her pediatrician for a well check. She reports a history of vaginal sex with 2 male partners and agrees to have a hormonal subcutaneous implant placed to avoid pregnancy. After 4 months of bothersome spotting, Rosita returns to have the implant removed. Rosita’s provider strongly counsels against removal. Jasmine and Rosita are members of populations that have been systematically marginalized throughout American history. Their stories are derived from real cases and reveal how structural racism impacts modern contraceptive care. Specifically, their cases are examples of statistical discrimination, wherein the tendency to disproportionately recommend long-acting reversible contraception to historically marginalized communities does not follow the central tenants of sexual and reproductive justice, including acknowledging historical harms in health care and honoring bodily autonomy for all people. By sharing Jasmine and Rosita’s stories, we use a reproductive justice lens to (1) examine the historical roots of disproportional prescription of long-acting reversible contraception to historically marginalized individuals, (2) discuss provider bias related to sexual and reproductive health care, and (3) illustrate how trauma-informed care with a recognition of historical trauma and the use of individuation can facilitate positive and equitable health outcomes.