The Next Infodemic: Abortion Misinformation.

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines an infodemic as the proliferation of false or misleading information that leads to confusion, mistrust in health authorities, and the rejection of public health recommendations. The devastating impacts of an infodemic on public health were felt during the COVID-19 pandemic. We are now on the precipice of another infodemic, this one regarding abortion. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization resulted in the reversal of Roe v. Wade, which had protected a woman's right to have an abortion for nearly 50 years. The reversal of Roe v. Wade has given way to an abortion infodemic that is being exacerbated by a confusing and rapidly changing legislative landscape, the proliferation of abortion disinformants on the web, lax efforts by social media companies to abate abortion misinformation, and proposed legislation that threatens to prohibit the distribution of evidence-based abortion information. The abortion infodemic threatens to worsen the detrimental effects of the Roe v. Wade reversal on maternal morbidity and mortality. It also comes with unique barriers to traditional abatement efforts. In this piece, we lay out these challenges and urgently call for a public health research agenda on the abortion infodemic to stimulate the development of evidence-based public health efforts to mitigate the impact of misinformation on the increased maternal morbidity and mortality that is expected to result from abortion restrictions, particularly among marginalized populations.

The global impact of COVID-19 on abortion care.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic placed unprecedented strain on healthcare globally, which exacerbated factors leading to unplanned pregnancies. Objectives: The primary objective was to analyze the effect of COVID-19 on abortion services globally. Secondary objectives were to discuss issues regarding access to safe abortion and provide recommendations on continued access during pandemics. Search strategy: A search for relevant articles was conducted by utilizing multiple databases (PubMed, Cochrane, etc.). Selection criteria: Studies on COVID-19 and abortion were included. Data collection & analysis: The legislation governing abortion services across the globe was examined, inclusive of modifications to service provision during the pandemic. Global data on abortion rates and analyses of selected articles were also included. Main results: 14 countries instituted legislative changes related to the pandemic, 11 relaxed abortion regulations, while three restricted abortion access. An increase in abortion rates was seen particularly where telemedicine was available. Where abortions were postponed, second-trimester abortions increased after services resumed. Conclusions: Legislation, risk of exposure to infection, and access to telemedicine affect access to abortion. The use of novel technologies, maintaining existing infrastructure and enhancing the roles of trained manpower for safe abortion access is recommended to avoid the marginalization of women's health and reproductive rights.

Telemedicine medical abortion service in Georgia: an evaluation of a strategy with reduced number of in-Clinic visits.

PURPOSE: To evaluate feasibility and acceptability of a medical abortion service that offers: a telemedicine visit (in place of an in-person visit) during a mandatory waiting period, and at-home follow-up with the use of multi-level pregnancy tests (MLPT). METHODS: Participants were screened for eligibility in clinic, and during the waiting period, received a telephone call to confirm desire to proceed with the service. Participants were mailed a study package containing mifepristone, misoprostol, two multi-level pregnancy tests, and instructions for their use. Follow-up consultation took place by phone to evaluate abortion completeness. The analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: One-hundred twenty-two participants were enrolled in the study, and 120 chose to proceed with the abortion after the waiting period and were sent a study package. One participant was lost to follow up. The majority of participants did not experience problems receiving the study package (94.1%, n = 112), took mifepristone (100%, n = 119), misoprostol (99.2%, n = 118), and MLPTs (99.1%, n = 116) as instructed, and forwent additional clinic visits (91.6%, n = 109). All participants were satisfied with the service. Most participants had a complete abortion without a procedure (95.8%, n = 114). CONCLUSIONS: The adapted telemedicine medical abortion service was feasible and satisfactory to participants and has the potential to make medical abortion more patient-centered where waiting periods are mandated.

"In some clinics, they said it's elective, and then they would refuse": A Mixed-Methods Study on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on access to abortion services in Germany.

OBJECTIVE: The World Health Organization recognizes abortion as essential health care and has encouraged governments to ensure access to abortion services throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the threat of infection combined with government responses to COVID-19 have impacted access to abortion services globally. This study explores access to abortion in Germany during the pandemic. METHODS: This study used a mixed-methods design. An analysis of data collected by Women on Web (WoW) was carried out to assess women's reasons for choosing telemedicine abortion outside the formal health system in Germany during the pandemic. Descriptive statistics were generated for 2057 requests for telemedicine abortion received by WoW between March 2020-March 2021. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight healthcare professionals involved in the provision of abortion services to explore how they perceive of women's access to abortion services in Germany during the pandemic. RESULTS: The quantitative analysis found that preferences and needs for privacy (47.3%), secrecy (44.4%) and comfort (43.9%) were the most common reasons for choosing telemedicine abortion. COVID-19 was another important reason (38.8%). The thematic analysis of the interviews was organized into two overarching themes: service provision, and axes of difference. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic affected the provision of abortion services as well as the circumstances of women seeking abortion. The main barriers to access were financial constraints, privacy issues, and lack of abortion providers. Throughout the pandemic, accessing abortion services was more difficult for many women in Germany, especially women experiencing multiple and overlapping forms of discrimination.

A Critique of Expertise for Health Law.

A health justice approach requires a progressive critique of expertise. This article considers two recent high-profile cases - the mask mandate and medication abortion -- to understand how we should think the mobilization of expertise in the context of public health law. Following from this, the article offers news ways to better understand how to think of the relationship between health law, expertise, and politics.