Reproductive Justice Media Reference Guide

Defining Reproductive Justice

Forward Together and our partners who co-authored this guide (California Coalition for Reproductive Freedom, California Latinas for Reproductive Justice, Colorado Organization for Latina Opportunity and Reproductive Rights, and the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health) define reproductive justice as:

re • pro • duc • tive just • tice

All people having the social, political, and economic power and resources to make healthy decisions about their gender, bodies, sexuality, and families for themselves and their communities.

From abortion access to the rights of incarcerated individuals and resources for young families, reproductive justice issues run the gamut. Though reproductive justice is expansive, it is more than a container for a set of issues; it is an analytic framework and a social movement for self-determination.

The reproductive justice framework was created in 1994 by Black women social justice leaders after attending the International Conference for Population and Development in Cairo, Egypt. They saw international women activists using a human rights framework (including economic justice, the right to education and healthcare, and to be free from violence) to push for the same rights that they were fighting for in the United States. These movement leaders spliced together “reproductive rights” and “social justice” to create “reproductive justice,” a human rights way of “looking at the totality of women’s lives.”² Reproductive justice activists treat abortion and other reproductive health services as akin to the resources all human beings are entitled to—such as healthcare, education, housing, and food—in an equitable, democratic society.³ Reproductive justice provides an approach to understanding that reproductive health and decisions must be contextualized, and that centering underrepresented voices is critical to defining the problem, posing solutions, and leading the movement for change. (See the sidebar, “What’s the difference between reproductive health, reproductive rights, and reproductive justice?”)

United States Induced Abortion Facts⁸

• Of all pregnancies among U.S. women in 2011, 45%—nearly half—were unintended. About 4 in 10 of these pregnancies were terminated by abortion.
• Hispanics accounted for 25% of abortion procedures in 2014.
• The abortion rate in 2014 was 14.6 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44, down 14% from 16.9 per 1,000 in 2011. So the parallel statement would be: Between 2011 and 2014, abortion rates fell by 14%.
• A first-trimester abortion carries minimal risk—less than 0.05%—of major complications leading to hospital care, making it one of the safest medical procedures.
• Of abortions obtained in 2014, 59% were by patients who had also had at least one birth.
• In 2014, some 75% of abortion patients were poor or low-income; 26% had incomes of 100–199% of the federal poverty level; and 49% had incomes of less than 100% of the federal poverty level ($15,730 for a two-person family).
• In 2014, 90% of all U.S. counties had no clinic, and 39% of women of reproductive age lived in those counties.
• In 2011, 84% of clinics reported anti-abortion harassment: 80% reported being picketed, with 53% reporting being picketed 20 times or more in a year, 47% reported receiving harassing phone calls, and 3% reporting receiving at least one bomb threat.

Latin America and the Caribbean: Abortion Access Facts

U.S. Latinx Communities and Abortion

Latinxs in the U.S. face significant barriers to abortion services. Latinas, in particular, have the lowest rate of health insurance coverage of women of any other racial or ethnic group. For decades, Latinxs have been the most uninsured racial and ethnic group. Because of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), over 4 million Latinx individuals have gained health insurance, lowering the uninsurance rate of the Latinx community from over 40 percent to about 31 percent.¹³ Latinxs face added barriers to reproductive healthcare, including lack of affordable insurance options, poverty, lack of culturally and linguistically appropriate care, fear of apprehension by immigration enforcement, and bans on abortion access for women being held in immigration detention. Latinxs are more likely to work in low-wage sectors of the economy, including service and agriculture, and for small firms, which are less likely to offer health coverage to their employees.

While not all Latinxs are immigrants, a large portion of immigrants to the U.S. are from Latinx countries, and understanding the intersection of immigration and reproductive health is important context.

• Immigrant women make up 13% of the total female population in the U.S.,¹⁴ yet experience some of the most persistent barriers to comprehensive reproductive healthcare services, such as access to contraception or consistent visits to providers.¹⁵
• Women composed 46 percent of the 11.4 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States in the 2008-12 period.¹⁶
• In the U.S., roughly 45% of immigrant Latin@s and 55% of non-citizen Latin@s do not have healthcare insurance,¹⁷ even after implementation of the ACA.
• Federal policies make it nearly impossible to access abortion care in immigration detention, despite the fact that many detainees are women of reproductive age and that 60–80% of Central American women experience sexual assault crossing the U.S.-Mexico border¹⁸ and inside detention facilities themselves.

Because immigrants are as diverse a group as any, reporters should steer clear of writing about immigrant communities as if they are from one region, religion, or cultural background, and instead note the wide range of immigration “statuses” and consequently the disparate healthcare options afforded different populations. When reporting on various Latinx communities, it is important to consider the legality and attitudes about abortion in their country of origin, and to remain open to how legality and culture may affect personal beliefs or engagement with reproductive healthcare services here. (See the sidebar, “Medication Abortion (the abortion pill).”)

Legal Rights, But Limited Access

In the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, the U.S. Supreme Court found that women, in consultation with their physicians, have a constitutionally protected right to abortion in the earlier stages of pregnancy—that is, before viability, which is estimated at around 24 weeks gestation²⁸—free from government interference. Despite this groundbreaking decision, many women in the United States have never had true access. State-level policies like mandatory waiting periods, exclusion of abortion coverage in Medicaid and other health insurance plans, parental involvement laws, targeted regulation of abortion providers (known as TRAP laws), and similar barriers disproportionately affect young women, low-income women, and people living in rural communities by limiting their ability to find and afford safe and legal abortion.

Since the passage of the Hyde Amendment in 1976, Congress has implemented bans that deny abortion coverage, effectively withholding abortion access from people who qualify for Medicaid and Medicare, military families, federal employees and their dependents, Peace Corps volunteers, Native Americans, women in federal prisons and immigration detention centers, and residents of the District of Columbia.

Incomplete: Roe v. Wade guaranteed women the right to an abortion.

More Accurate: Despite the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, which granted the right to legal abortion, many barriers, exist especially for those living in poverty, living in rural areas, or living in states that have used multiple strategies to restrict access to the procedure.

The Hyde Amendment and Other Funding Bans

Congress first passed the Hyde Amendment in 1976 (just three years after Roe v. Wade), and the amendment renews annually in the federal appropriations process. The Hyde Amendment prohibits federal funding for Medicaid coverage of abortion care, except when a person is pregnant as a result of rape or incest or when the pregnancy endangers the person’s life. Though Medicaid covers a range of pre- and post-natal care, Congress prohibits Medicaid from covering abortion in nearly all circumstances, and abortion is the only medical procedure banned from the Medicaid program in this way. States can opt to supplement Medicaid funding with state funds in order to provide abortion coverage for Medicaid enrollees, though few have done so. Congress’s yearly reauthorizations of the Hyde Amendment have varied in permitting abortion for life-threatening pregnancies or those caused by rape or incest.

Denial of abortion coverage has a profoundly harmful effect on people and families, particularly those already struggling to make ends meet. (See sidebar, “Rosie Jiménez: The First Victim of Hyde.”) For those who qualify and enroll in Medicaid, the cost of ending a pregnancy forces many people to make impossible decisions—decisions such as keeping food on a family table or paying for needed healthcare. For others, cost is an ultimately insurmountable barrier.

• Over 9 million women of reproductive age—nearly 1 in 7—are insured by Medicaid.³⁰
• A woman who attempts to access abortion services but is denied, is three times more likely to fall into poverty than a woman who is able to get the care she needs.³¹
• Of low-income women on Medicaid who seek abortion care, 1 in 4 are unable to afford the out-of-pocket costs and are forced to carry the pregnancy to term.³²

It is also noteworthy that Latinxs support repealing Hyde. According to polling data released in September 2016³³:

• Of Latin@ voters in battleground states, 60% support a bill that would require Medicaid to cover all pregnancy-related care, including abortions.
• Of Latin@ voters in battleground states, 75% agree with the statement, “however we feel about abortion, politicians should not be allowed to deny a woman’s health coverage for it just because she’s poor.”

Latinxs’ Views on Abortion

Reporting on racial inequities in who obtains abortion services without exploring the larger context often leads to inaccurate stories that perpetuate myths and stereotypes about communities of color, especially Latinxs.

In the United States, women of color are regularly targeted for scrutiny and policing of their reproductive health decisions by both policymakers and through popular culture. Examples include a billboard campaign targeting Latinas and Black women to convince them to support the efforts to make abortion illegal.

Abortion is illegal or severely restricted in the majority of Latin American countries, and country of origin may influence various communities’ beliefs about abortion once in the United States. Considering how beliefs and experiences of reproductive healthcare from the country of origin still impact women’s decisions and attitudes is an important factor in understanding data about reproductive health.

Even with this context, the data show high support for abortion access across Latinx communities.³⁴

• Of Latin@ voters, 82% believe women should make their own decisions when it comes to abortion.
• Despite some church leaders’ anti-abortion views, 60% of Latin@s agree that abortions should remain legal.
• Of Latin@ voters, 89% say they would offer support to a loved one who had an abortion.
• Of Latin@ voters, 50% agree with the statement, “my personal religious values can support a woman making her own decision about abortion.”

Some recent polls about abortion access and public opinion include:

• 2016 National Latin@ Voter Poll (2016)
• Apoyo y Respeto (Support and Respect): Texas Latin@ Voters’ Attitudes on Abortion (2014)
• Unearthing Latina/o Voices on Family, Pregnancy and Reproductive Justice (2010)

Latinx Youth Access to Abortion

Public discussions of abortion often focus on adolescents, creating the impression that most abortion patients are teenagers, yet the vast majority of women having abortions are 20 years old and older.³⁵ Trends in reporting about teen pregnancy often reinforce these false but popular stereotypes. In reality, recent data show:

• The pregnancy rate among young Hispanic women has steadily declined since the 1990s.³⁶ In 2011, the abortion rate for young Hispanic women was 12.7 per 1,000 women aged 15 to 19.
• Even though stereotypes about teen pregnancy must be dispelled, young people have very real reproductive health needs.
• Even with increased birth control use, nearly 82% of all pregnancies among young people are unintended.³⁷

From a policy-making perspective, adolescents and minors face the harshest restrictions in accessing abortion services. As of August 2016, laws in 38 states require a minor seeking an abortion to involve one or both parents in the decision.³⁸ Most young women do consult their parents before seeking abortion care, but those who do not may face dangerous circumstances at home. Fifty percent of pregnant teens have experienced violence; 30 percent of teens who do not tell their parents about their abortions feared violence or being forced to leave home.³⁹

Given that the procedure is relatively rare for young people, reporters should delve into the challenges young people may face that hinder access to safe and confidential abortion care. To provide a more accurate picture, reporting on young people’s access to abortion should take into consideration the rarity of a person under 20 seeking the procedure, while highlighting the circumstances under which they do. A popular criticism is that ensuring youth access to abortion is promoting abortion. Instead, the goal of reproductive justice advocates is to ensure every person has affordable access to the information and services they need to make reproductive health decisions. That includes comprehensive sex education, as well as contraception, prenatal, maternity, and abortion care. Reporting about abortion and youth sexuality must consider the variety of social factors affecting young Latinx people. A well-rounded discussion does not rely on blame and judgment, and instead examines the conditions young people face that impact their health and safety. (See the sidebar, “Youth, Abortion, and Stigma.”)

Shame, Stigma, and Reproductive Health

While abortion is one of the safest and most common gynecological procedures that women experience, societal beliefs about the “proper” role of women and women’s sexual behaviors may result in shame and stigma. Individuals who have had an abortion can worry about judgment from others, isolation, self-judgment, and community condemnation.⁴¹ The way media frames an issue can greatly influence public opinion and discourse. When politicians use social issues like abortion to incite divisive rhetoric, it is critical that media provide context and facts. Instead, coverage of abortion often perpetuates stigma and misinformation.

Reporters should avoid attempting to describe the “types” of individuals who have abortions or speculating about the cultural reasons why some groups obtain them more than others. Rather, reporting can include background on the many factors and circumstances that contribute to an individual’s decision about an unintended pregnancy as well as relevant data on income and healthcare access, while avoiding stereotypical traps by referencing sexual behavior or decision making.

Storytelling is one way abortion advocates have been shifting a culture of shame towards one of compassion and support for basic healthcare rights. Considering that nearly a third of women in the United States will have an abortion by age 45, abortion storytelling takes this common experience out of isolation and asserts the humanity of the women having abortions. One comprehensive survey of 16 major print and online media outlets showed that abortion is regularly covered as a political issue more than as a health issue, and that women experiencing abortion are rarely present in the coverage.⁴² The survey also found that in all stories covering abortion between 2014 and 2015 there were no personal stories of Latinas, or any women of color.⁴³ Campaigns like Advocates for Youth’s “1 in 3,” “The Abortion Diary” podcast, or “Shout Your Abortion” provide outlets for people to share their abortion stories and be in community with others who may feel silenced or afraid.

Shame and stigma also affect access to reproductive healthcare, including abortion. Many people—not only women, but also transgender men, intersex, and gender-nonconforming people, and others—can get pregnant and need access to a full range of reproductive health options, including abortion. However, 42 percent of transgender men have experienced verbal harassment, physical assault, or denial of equal treatment in a doctor’s office or hospital.⁴⁴ Many transgender individuals report that they must teach their medical providers about transgender care.⁴⁵ In reproductive healthcare and abortion care, transgender men are often an invisible population. Barriers to care include lack of culturally competent service providers, assumptions and stereotypes about gender identity and sexuality, and lack of legal protections to protect trans patients from discrimination.   

Journalists must be vigilant in verifying data that supports abortion claims. Groups trying to restrict abortion often cite discredited or misrepresented research on its impact on women. Exhaustive reviews by panels convened by the U.S. and British governments have concluded, for example, that there is no association between abortion and breast cancer. There is also no indication that abortion is a risk factor for other cancers.⁴⁶ Claims of depression or other emotional distress caused by an abortion have also been widely disputed by medical authorities, who find these effects can be attributed primarily to the impact of shame and stigma on those who have had an abortion, rather than to the procedure itself. In an effort to provide a balanced perspective, journalists should exercise caution that they do not take medically inaccurate claims at face value and ensure they are not comparing them to medically sound arguments.

Other reproductive issues can bring on similar feelings of shame and stigma, such as being a young parent, having a sexually transmitted infection (STI), or expressions of sexuality and gender identity. Reporters covering reproductive justice issues like these have an opportunity to share wider context of individual lives and important health data that help build readers’ understanding and curb unnecessary judgment while reporting the facts.

Incomplete: She had a sexually transmitted infection.

More accurate: Similar to more than one in six people between the ages 14 and 45 in the U.S., she was diagnosed with genital herpes.

Anti-Choice Organizing

A network of national- and state-level organizations work to undermine access to abortion. These groups include: the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Americans United for Life, Family Research Council, National Right to Life, National Pro-Life Alliance, and the Susan B. Anthony List, which supports candidates who are opposed to abortion.

These groups have launched an unprecedented attack on abortion access and affordability, and more than 338 abortion restrictions have been enacted since 2010. The 338 state abortion restrictions adopted since 2010—the year anti-abortion forces took control of many state legislatures and governors’ mansions—account for 30 percent of the 1,142 abortion restrictions enacted by states since the 1973 Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade.⁴⁷ We anticipate an even greater increase in restrictive federal legislation under the Trump administration which has attacked abortion and healthcare access since day one.

In addition to policy-oriented groups, radical anti-choice groups like Operation Rescue, Live Action, and the Center for Medical Progress engage in deceptive and misleading campaigns using undercover video, surveillance, and sting operations to undermine abortion providers and to stimulate outrage amongst conservative legislators to further restrict access to abortion.

The increasingly hostile policy climate and in-your-face actions of radical anti-choice groups create a climate where threatening and targeting abortion providers and abortion clinic staff can thrive. In a recent study of national clinic violence,⁴⁸ over 50 percent of clinics report threatening and intimidating behaviors, including “wanted” style posters, leaflets featuring doctors’ photographs and home addresses, and aggressive blockades.

There continues to be a need for the media to distinguish between opposing viewpoints on issues like abortion, and the incendiary rhetoric and misinformation that critics of reproductive health services use. While inflammatory quotes might be newsworthy, their use should be avoided in a story that strives to be objective. This is increasingly important as we enter a time when there is a strong government effort to reduce and eliminate abortion access, and media has a significant role in disputing fake news.

When covering a debate about abortion policies, reporters often refer to those who advocate for access to abortion as pro-choice while those who would eliminate the right as pro-life. These labels skew the perspectives of both individuals and organizations quoted in news coverage, offering a stereotype rather than an accurate portrayal.

Incomplete: abortion advocates, pro-abortion, pro-life

More accurate: reproductive health advocates, those seeking to restrict abortion

Terminology

abortion: Abortion includes any medical procedure used to terminate pregnancy. There are different methods of abortion commonly performed depending on length of pregnancy. One is through a medication and the other methods are procedures that take place in a clinic, including aspiration (the most common method) and dilation and evacuation (D&E).⁴⁹

abortion after 12 weeks: Abortions beyond a specific point (such as 20 weeks postfertilization or the third trimester) have been called “later abortion” or “later-term abortion.”⁵⁰ These phrases similar to “partial birth abortion” are evocative, highly politically charged terms that have no actual medical definition. While abortion is constitutionally permissible up to the time of viability, state and federal legislators continue to introduce bills to ban abortion after 6, 12, or 20 weeks.⁵¹ Communications on these types of bans should avoid eliciting a visceral response, and move away from the phrases “later” or “late-term” or “partial-birth” abortions. When appropriate use: “as a pregnancy progresses,” “at different points in pregnancy,” and “after 12 weeks” to describe abortion later in a pregnancy.

fetus: A fetus is defined from 8 weeks after conception until term while in the uterus.⁵²

medication abortion: An abortion using the medication mifepristone, which is prescribed by a medical provider, is a medication abortion. A woman can take this medication in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy.⁵³

surgical abortion: There are several forms of surgical abortion. The most common type of surgical abortion in the U.S. is done by aspiration. It is performed in a clinic or hospital, and can be used up to 16 weeks after the person’s last period.⁵⁴

unintended pregnancy: A pregnancy may be mistimed, unplanned, or unwanted at the time of conception.⁵⁵

viability: Roe v. Wade developed a trimester framework for gestational age, and declared that abortions in the third trimester could only be performed if the health of the mother was in jeopardy, implying that a fetus was legally viable at 28 weeks. Since Roe was passed, the legal definition of viability has been delegated to individual states. States often rely on the attending physician to determine viability. For states that define viability, the limit ranges from 19 to 28 weeks.⁵⁶

Endnotes

1. Reichard, R. (2015). Why we say Latinx: Trans and gender non-conforming people explain. Retrieved from: http://www.latina.com/lifestyle/our-issues/why-we-say-latinx-trans-gender-non-conforming-people-explain
2. Ross, L.(n. d.). Bring human rights home. Makers. Retrieved from: http://www.makers.com/moments/new-paradigm-reproductive-justice
3. Roberts, D. (2015). Reproductive justice, not just rights. Dissent. Retrieved from: https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/reproductive-justice-not-just-rights
4. Forward Together (formerly Asian Communities for Reproductive Justice). (2005). A new vision for advancing our movement for reproductive health, reproductive rights and reproductive justice. Retrieved from: http://forwardtogether.org/assets/docs/ACRJ-A-New-Vision.pdf
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Ross, L. (2006). What is reproductive justice? Sistersong Reproductive Justice Collective. Retrieved from: https://www.trustblackwomen.org/our-work/what-is-reproductive-justice/9-what-is-reproductive-justice
8. Guttmacher Institute. (2017). Fact sheet: Induced abortion in the United States. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states
9. Guttmacher Institute. (2016). Abortion in Latin America and the Caribbean: Incidence and trends. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/facts-abortion-latin-america-and-caribbean
10. Ibid.
11. American Immigration Council. (2014). Fact sheet: Immigrant women in the United States, a portrait of demographic diversity. Retrieved from: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/immigrant-women-united-states-portrait-demographic-diversity
12. Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR). (2016). The world’s abortion laws. Retrieved from: http://worldabortionlaws.com/
13. Obama, B. (2016). Presidential proclamation—National Hispanic Heritage Month, 2016. Retrieved from: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/09/15/presidential-proclamation-national-hispanic-heritage-month-2016
14. American Immigration Council. (2014). Fact sheet: Immigrant women in the United States, a portrait of demographic diversity. Retrieved from: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/immigrant-women-united-states-portrait-demographic-diversity
15. Strong Families. (2015). Immigrant communities and abortion. Retrieved from: http://strongfamiliesmovement.org/rj-immigrant-access
16. Migration Policy Institute. (2015). Immigrant women in the United States. Retrieved from: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/immigrant-women-united-states#Unauthorized%20Population
17. National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health. (2015). Immigrant Latin@s & abortion: The fight for access to comprehensive coverage and care, fact sheet. Retrieved from: http://latinainstitute.org/sites/default/files/NLIRH_ImmWmnAbrtn_FactSheet_Eng_R6.pdf
18. Siegal, E. M., & Bonello, D. (2014). Is rape the price to pay for migrant women chasing the American Dream? Fusion. Retrieved from: http://fusion.net/story/17321/is-rape-the-price-to-pay-for-migrant-women-chasing-the-american-dream/
19. COMS Project. (2016). Wayfinder: Self-induced abortion. For access, email: hello@COMSProject.org
20. Grossman, D., Holt, K., Pena, M., Lara, D., Veatch, M., Cordova, D., Gold, M., Winikoff, B., & Blanchard, K. (2010). Self-induction of abortion among women in the United States. Reproductive Health Matters, 18(36), 136–146. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0968-8080(10)36534-7
21. Lafaurie, M. M., Grossman, D., Troncoso, E., Billings, D. L., & Chávez, S. (2005). Women’s perspectives on medical abortion in Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru: A qualitative study. Reproductive Health Matters, 13(26), 75–83. DOI: 10.1016/S0968-8080(05)26199-2 Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0968-8080(05)26199-2
22. Barbosa, R., & Arilha, M. (1993). The Brazilian experience with Cytotec. Studies in Family Planning, 24(4), 236–240. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2939191?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
23. Lafaurie, M. M., Grossman, D., Troncoso, E., Billings, D. L., & Chávez, S. (2005). Women’s perspectives on medical abortion in Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru: A qualitative study. Reproductive Health Matters, 13:(26), 75–83. DOI: 10.1016/S0968-8080(05)26199-2 Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0968-8080(05)26199-2
24. Barbosa, R., & Arilha, M. (1993). The Brazilian experience with Cytotec. Studies in Family Planning. 24(4), 236–240. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2939191?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
25. Adams, J. E., & Mikesell, M. (n.d.). Primer on self-induced abortion, the SIA Legal Team. Retrieved from: https://www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/SIA-Legal-Team-Primer.pdf
26. Ibid.
27. COMS Project. (2016). Wayfinder: Self-induced abortion. For access, email: hello@COMSProject.org
28. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2012). ACOG statement on HR 3803. Retrieved from: http://www.acog.org/~/media/Departments/Government%20Relations%20and%20Outreach/20120618DCAborStmnt.pdf
29. Healthcare.gov. (n. d.). Coverage for lawfully present immigrants. Retrieved from: https://www.healthcare.gov/immigrants/lawfully-present-immigrants/
30. Ibis Reproductive Health. (n. d.). Research brief: The impact of Medicaid coverage restrictions on abortion. Retrieved from: http://allaboveall.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/MedicaidResearchBrief.pdf
31. Strong Families. (2015). Reproductive Justice Media Guide, The Hyde Amendment and other funding restrictions, Retrieved from: http://strongfamiliesmovement.org/rj-hyde
32. Bridges, E. (2014). Abortion and young people in the United States. Advocates for Youth, January 2014 http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/2296-abortion-and-young-people-in-the-united-states
33. Heart Research Associates. (2016). Battleground pollling on repealing the Hyde Amendment. Retrieved from: http://allaboveall.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/AllAboveAll_Hart_Battleground-Poll-2016-Memo.pdf
34. PerryUndem Research/Communication. (2016). Latino/a voters’ views on abortion: Retrieved from: http://latinainstitute.org/sites/default/files/NLIRH%20Public%20Survey%20Report_Final.pdf
35. Guttmacher Institute. (2017). Fact sheet: Induced abortion in the United States. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states
36. Guttmacher Institute. (2011). Tables. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/report_downloads/us-teen-pregnancy-trends-2011_tables.pdf
37. Mosher, W.D., & Jones, J. (2010). Use of contraception in the United States: 1982–2008. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital and Health Statistics, 23(29). Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_029.pdf
38. Guttmacher Institute. (2016). American teens’ sexual and reproductive health. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/american-teens-sexual-and-reproductive-health
39. Bridges, E. (2014). Abortion and young people in the United States. Advocates for Youth. Retrieved from: http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/2296-abortion-and-young-people-in-the-united-states
40. Valladares, E. S., Valle, G., & Jiménez, L. (Eds.). (2012). Supporting Latina/o youth: Strengthening Latina/o young families and communities. California Latinas for Reproductive Justice. Retrieved from: http://www.californialatinas.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/CLRJ_Supporting_Latina_O_Youth_Issue_Brief_1_FINAL.pdf
41. Cockrill, K., Upadhyay, U. D., Turan, J., & Foster, D. G. (2014). The stigma of having an abortion: Development of a scale and characteristics of women experiencing abortion stigma. Perspectives on Reproductive and Sexual Health, 45(2), 79–88. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/psrh/2013/05/stigma-having-abortion-development-scale-and-characteristics-women
42. Nixon, L., Seklir, L., Mejia, P., Cockrill, K., Herold, S., Woodruff, K., & Dorfman, L. (2017). Shaping stigma: An analysis of mainstream print and online news coverage of abortion, 2014–2015. Issue, 23, 1–36. Berkeley Media Studies Group. Retrieved from: http://seachangeprogram.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/bmsg_sea_change_issue23_abortion_stigma2017.pdf
43. Ibid.
44. Seaman, A. M., (2015). Transgender people face discrimination in healthcare. Reuters Health. Retrieved from: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-transgender-healthcare-discrimination-idUSKBN0M928B20150313
45. Grant, J. M., Mottet, L. A., &, Tanis, J. (Leads). (with Harrison, J., Herman, J. L., & Keisling, M.) (2011). Injustice at every turn: A report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and the National Center for Transgender Equality. Retrieved from: https://calculators.io/national-transgender-discrimination-survey/
46. Guttmacher Institute. (2017). Fact sheet: Induced abortion in the United States. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states
47. Guttmacher Institute. (2017). Policy Trends in the States: 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2017/01/policy-trends-states-2016
48. Feminist Majority Foundation. (2014). National clinic violence survey. Retrieved from: http://feminist.org/rrights/pdf/2015NCAPsurvey.pdf
49. 1 in 3. (n. d.). Abortion information and resources. Retrieved from: http://www.1in3campaign.org/resources/abortion-information-resources
50. Guttmacher Institute. (2017). Evidence You Can Use: Later Abortion. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/evidence-you-can-use/later-abortion
51. National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health. (2015). Bans on later abortion: A threat to health and dignity, fact sheet. Retrieved from: http://latinainstitute.org/sites/default/files/NLIRH_20WeekBan_FactSheet_Eng_R11.pdf
52. Barfield, W. D., & the Committee on Fetus and Newborn. (2011). Clinical reports: Standard terminology for fetal, infant, and perinatal deaths. Pediatrics, 128, 177-181. Retrieved from: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/128/1/177
53. Guttmacher Institute. (2017). Fact sheet: Induced abortion in the United States. Retrieved from: https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states
54. 1 in 3. (n. d.). campaign: Abortion information and resources. Retrieved from: http://www.1in3campaign.org/resources/abortion-information-resources
55. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015). Unintended pregnancy prevention, Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/unintendedpregnancy/
56. Arzuaga, B., & Lee, B. H. (2011). Pediatrics perspective: Limits of human viability in the US: A medicolegal review. Pediatrics, 128(6), 10471052. Retrieved from: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/128/6/1047.short