These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The harassment of U.S. abortion providers.
    Author: Forrest JD, Henshaw SK.
    Journal: Fam Plann Perspect; 1987; 19(1):9-13. PubMed ID: 3556539.
    Abstract:
    In 1985, 47 percent of abortion providers experienced antiabortion harassment. The approximately 1,250 facilities that were affected served 83 percent of all abortion patients. Nonhospital facilities performing 400 or more abortions a year were the most likely targets of antiabortion activity; 88 percent reported at least one type of harassment during the year. Picketing occurred at 80 percent of these facilities. Only six percent experienced picketing alone; the average facility was subjected to five different types of activity. Seventy-three percent of the facilities were the target of at least one illegal activity. A number of problems that made abortions more difficult or costly to provide were significantly related to the occurrence of antiabortion activity: increased expenditures for security and for legal services, loss of fire and casualty insurance, new licensing requirements and problems hiring staff. However, harassment did not appear to have affected the average number of abortions performed at large nonhospital facilities or the fee charged. In its most recent periodic surveys of abortion providers in the US, the Alan Guttmacher Institute included a series of questions about the kinds of antiabortion activities that may affect the provision of services. The survey was fielded in the late spring and the summer of 1986. Hospital administrators were asked about the levels of outside pressure to restrict or eliminate abortion services that they had encountered in 1984 and 1985. Nonhospital providers were asked about 12 specific antiabortion activities, as well as about any problems they had had with insurance, licensing requirements, and the general operation of their facilities. They also were asked whether the cost or difficulty of providing abortion services had increased significantly. A total of 722 hospitals and 927 nonhospital facilities answered the questions on harrassment. The respondents represented 62% of the total number of hospitals that provided abortion services in 1985 and 63% of the nonhospital facilities. The level of harrassment in 1985 varied by type and size of provider, but no group was immune from such activity. Among the hospital providers, 29% reported that they did not know if there had been any pressure from outside the hospital to restrict or eliminate their abortion services. Of hospitals with information on the question, 36% had been subjected to such pressure in 1985 and 64% had not. Nonhospital facilities performing 400 or more abortions a year were the most likely targets of antiabortion activity. 88% reported at least 1 type of harrassment during the year. Picketing occurred at 80% of these facilities. On 6% experienced picketing alone. The average facility was subjected to 5 different types of activity. More than half of the facilities experiencing any form of antiabortion harrassment also reported bomb threats (55-86%), loud demonstrations (52-84%), physical contact with or blocking of patients by picketers (59-83%), and distribution of antiabortion literature inside the facility (57-82%). A number of problems that made abortions more difficult or costly to provide were significantly related to the occurrence of antiabortion activity: increased expenditures for security and for legal services; loss of fire and casualty insurance; new licensing requirements; and problems hiring staff. Harrassment did not appear to have affected the average number of abortions performed at large nonhospital facilities or the fee charged.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]