Affiliation:
1. University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA
Abstract
Faith-based pregnancy centers strive to offer “alternatives to abortion” that supporters claim aid women and critics assert manipulate pregnant people, stigmatize abortion, and potentially delay clients from obtaining medical care. However, scholars know little about the exchanges within appointments and how clients make sense of these experiences. Drawing on ethnographic observations of client appointments in two pregnancy centers in the West and 29 in-depth interviews with clients, this article uses an intersectional framework to analyze client experiences. Clients favorably compared centers to clinical health care providers, emphasizing the unexpectedly attentive emotional care they received. These evaluations stem from clients’ reproductive histories, which are shaped by gender, racism, and economic inequalities that configure their access to and interactions within the health system. Emotional care serves to create and maintain pregnancy centers’ impression of legitimacy among clients.
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Social Psychology
Reference65 articles.
1. ACOG. 2018. “Facts Are Important: Medication Abortion ‘Reversal’ Is Not Supported by Science.” American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. https://www.acog.org/advocacy/facts-are-important/medication-abortion-reversal-is-not-supported-by-science.
2. Racial disparities in reproductive health outcomes
3. Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: evidence and interventions
4. Risk Factors for Legal Induced Abortion–Related Mortality in the United States