The Impact of Reduced Abortion Access on Minor Adolescents
Statement on Dobbs v. Jackson. Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine.
SAHM/NASPAG Statement on leaked draft SCOTUS opinion regarding Mississippi v. Jackson Women’s Health. Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine.
- Jerman J.
- Jones R.K.
- Onda T.
Current Barriers to Abortion Access Among Minor Adolescents
Travel challenges resulting in delayed care
Cost barriers and limited access to telehealth
Parental consent and notification laws
Parental involvement in minors’ abortion.
Strategic Responses in Support of Minor Adolescents
|Barrier specific to minor adolescents||Example approach||Resources and organizations (hyperlinks included)|
|Need for youth-specific education and clinical support||Advocates for Youth|
American Academy of Pediatrics
Power to Decide
SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change
|Travel challenges||Abortion finder|
Center for Reproductive Rights
National Abortion Federation
Regulatory Assistance for Abortion Providers
|Cost barriers and limited access to telehealth||Center for Reproductive Rights|
National Network of Abortion Funds
Reproductive Health Access Project
|Parental consent and notification laws||Guttmacher Institute|
Repro Legal Help
National Abortion Federation Hotline
NARAL Pro Choice America
Individual, Community, and National Efforts are Needed
- Dobbs v. Jackson Women's health organization, 597. Supreme Court of the United States, 2022
- Call to action: Healthcare Providers must Speak up for adolescent abortion access.J Adolesc Health. 2022; 70: 189-191
- Statement on Dobbs v. Jackson. Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine.(Available at:)https://www.adolescenthealth.org/SAHM-News/Consensus-Statement_DobbsDate: 2022Date accessed: August 29, 2022
- SAHM/NASPAG Statement on leaked draft SCOTUS opinion regarding Mississippi v. Jackson Women’s Health. Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine.(Available at:)https://www.adolescenthealth.org/SAHM-News/SAHM-NASPAG-Statement-on-leaked-draft-SCOTUS-o-(2).aspxDate: 2022Date accessed: August 29, 2022
- Abortion Surveillance - United States, 2019.MMWR Surveill Summ. 2021; 70: 1-29
- Characteristics of U.S. Abortion Patients in 2014 and changes since 2008, New York: Guttmacher Institute.(Available at:)https://www.guttmacher.org/report/characteristics-us-abortion-patients-2014Date: 2016Date accessed: August 29, 2022
- Assessing and supporting adolescents' capacity for autonomous decision-making in health-care Settings: New Guidance from the World health organization.J Adolesc Health. 2022; 71: 10-13
- Denial of abortion because of provider gestational age limits in the United States.Am J Public Health. 2014; 104: 1687-1694
- Access to choice: Examining differences between adolescent and adult abortion fund service recipients.Health Soc Care Community. 2018; 26: 695-704
- Revealing Economic and Racial Injustices: Demographics of abortion fund Callers on the U.S.-Mexico Border.Womens Reprod Health (Phila). 2021; 8: 188-202
- Sexual and reproductive health care: A position paper of the Society for adolescent health and medicine.J Adolesc Health. 2014; 54: 491-496
- Parental involvement in minors’ abortion.(Available at:)https://www.guttmacher.org/print/state-policy/explore/parental-involvement-minors-abortionsDate: 2022Date accessed: August 9, 2022
- Abortion in adolescents: Epidemiology, confidentiality, and methods.Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 21: 390-395
- The Adolescent’s right to confidential care when considering abortion.Pediatrics. 2017; 139
- Patterns of consultation among adolescent minors obtaining an abortion.Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1994; 64: 310-316
- Young Women's experiences obtaining judicial bypass for abortion in Texas.J Adolesc Health. 2019; 64: 20-25
- SisterSong Women of Color reproductive justice Collective. Reproductive Justice.(Available at:)
Conflict of interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.