'How shall we survive': a qualitative study of women's experiences following denial of menstrual regulation (MR) services in Bangladesh.

BackgroundAbout one quarter of women in Bangladesh are denied menstrual regulation (MR) due to advanced gestation [J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 41(3):161-163, 2015, Issues Brief (Alan Guttmacher Inst) (3):1-8, 2012]. Little is known about barriers to MR services, and whether women denied MR seek abortion elsewhere, self-induce, or continue the pregnancy.MethodsAfter obtaining authorization from four health facilities in Bangladesh, we recruited eligible and interested women in to the study and requested informed consent for study participation. We conducted in-depth interviews with 20 women denied MR from four facilities in four districts in Bangladesh. Interviews were translated and transcribed, and the transcripts were analyzed by two researchers through an iterative process using a qualitative content analysis approach.ResultsOf those interviewed, 12 women sought abortion elsewhere and eight of these women were successful; four women who sought subsequent services were denied again. Two of the eight women who subsequently terminated their pregnancies suffered from complications. None of the participants were aware of the legal gestational limit for government-approved MR services. Given that all participants were initially denied services because they were beyond the legal gestational limit for MR and there were no reported risks to any of the mothers' health, we presume that the eight terminations performed subsequently were done illegally.ConclusionsBarriers to seeking safe MR services need to be addressed to reduce utilization of potentially unsafe alternative abortion services and to improve women's health and well being in Bangladesh. Findings from this study indicate a need to raise awareness about legal MR services; provide information to women on where, how and when they can access these services; train more MR providers; improve the quality and safety of second trimester services; and strengthen campaigns to educate women about contraception and pregnancy risk throughout the reproductive lifespan to prevent unintended pregnancies

From \u27Shark-Week\u27 to \u27Mangina\u27: An Analysis of Words Used by People of Marginalized Sexual Orientations and/or Gender Identities to Replace Common Sexual and Reproductive Health Terms

Purpose: To explore sexual and reproductive health (SRH)-related word-use among sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals in the United States. Methods: In 2019, we fielded an online quantitative survey on the SRH experiences of SGM adults. Eligible participants included transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive (TGE) people assigned female or intersex at birth, and cisgender sexual minority women (CSMW) in the United States. The survey asked participants to indicate if they used each of nine SRH terms, and if not, to provide the word(s) they used. We analyzed patterns in replacement words provided by respondents and tested for differences by gender category with tests of proportions. Results: Among 1704 TGE and 1370 CSMW respondents, 613 (36%) TGE respondents and 92 (7%) CSMW respondents replaced at least 1 SRH term (p-for-difference \u3c0.001). Many (23%) replacement words/phrases were entirely unique. For six out of the nine terms, TGE respondents indicated that use of the provided term would depend on the context, the term did not apply to them, or they did not have a replacement word/phrase that worked for them. Conclusions: SRH terms commonly used in clinical and research settings cause discomfort and dysphoria among some SGM individuals. To address inequities in access to and quality of SRH care among SGM individuals, and to overcome long standing fear of mistreatment in clinical settings, more intentional word-use and elicitation from providers and researchers could increase the quality and affirming nature of clinical and research experiences for SGM people

Abortion experiences and preferences of transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people in the United States

Background: Transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people who were assigned female or intersex at birth experience pregnancy and have abortions. Scarce data have been published on individual abortion experiences or preferences of this understudied population. Objective: This study aimed to fill existing evidence gaps on the abortion experiences and preferences of transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people in the United States to inform policies and practices to improve access to and quality of abortion care for this population. Study Design: In 2019, we recruited transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people who were assigned female or intersex at birth at the age of ≥18 years from across the United States to participate in an online survey about sexual and reproductive health recruited through The Population Research in Identities and Disparities for Equality Study and online postings. We descriptively analyzed closed- and open-ended survey responses related to pregnancy history, abortion experiences, preferences for abortion method, recommendations to improve abortion care for transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people, and respondent sociodemographic characteristics. Results: Most of the 1694 respondents were \u3c30 years of age. Respondents represented multiple gender identities and sexual orientations and resided across all 4 United States Census Regions. Overall, 210 respondents (12%) had ever been pregnant; these 210 reported 433 total pregnancies, of which 92 (21%) ended in abortion. For respondents’ most recent abortion, 41 (61%) were surgical, 23 (34%) were medication, and 3 (5%) were another method (primarily herbal). Most recent abortions took place at ≤9 weeks’ gestation (n=41, 61%). If they were to need an abortion today, respondents preferred medication abortion over surgical abortion in a 3:1 ratio (n=703 vs n=217), but 514 respondents (30%) did not know which method they would prefer. The reasons for medication abortion preference among the 703 respondents included a belief that it is the least invasive method (n=553, 79%) and the most private method (n=388, 55%). To improve accessibility and quality of abortion care for transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive patients, respondents most frequently recommended that abortion clinics adopt gender-neutral or gender-affirming intake forms, that providers use gender-neutral language, and that greater privacy be incorporated into the clinic. Conclusion: These data contribute substantially to the evidence base on individual experiences of and preferences for abortion care for transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people. Findings can be used to adapt abortion care to better include and affirm the experiences of this underserved population

Pregnancy intentions and outcomes among transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people assigned female or intersex at birth in the United States: Results from a national, quantitative survey

Background: Transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive (TGE) people experience pregnancy. Quantitative data about pregnancy intentions and outcomes of TGE people are needed to identify patterns in pregnancy intentions and outcomes and to inform clinicians how best to provide gender-affirming and competent pregnancy care. Aims: We sought to collect data on pregnancy intentions and outcomes among TGE people assigned female or intersex at birth in the United States. Methods: Collaboratively with a study-specific community advisory team, we designed a customizable, online survey to measure sexual and reproductive health experiences among TGE people. Eligible participants included survey respondents who identified as a man or within the umbrella of transgender, nonbinary, or gender-expansive identities; were 18 years or older; able to complete an electronic survey in English; lived in the United States; and were assigned female or intersex at birth. Participants were recruited through The PRIDE Study–a national, online, longitudinal cohort study of sexual and gender minority people–and externally via online social media postings, TGE community e-mail distribution lists, in-person TGE community events, and academic and community conferences. We conducted descriptive analyses of pregnancy-related outcomes and report frequencies overall and by racial and ethnic identity, pregnancy intention, or testosterone use. Results: Out of 1,694 eligible TGE respondents who provided reproductive history data, 210 (12%) had been pregnant. Of these, 115 (55%) had one prior pregnancy, 47 (22%) had two prior pregnancies, and 48 (23%) had three or more prior pregnancies. Of the 433 pregnancies, 169 (39%) resulted in live birth, 142 (33%) miscarried, 92 (21%) ended in abortion, two (0.5%) ended in stillbirth, two (0.5%) had an ectopic pregnancy, and seven (2%) were still pregnant; nineteen pregnancies (4%) had an unknown outcome. Among live births, 39 (23%) were delivered via cesarean section. Across all pregnancies, 233 (54%) were unintended. Fifteen pregnancies occurred after initiation of testosterone, and four pregnancies occurred while taking testosterone. Among all participants, 186 (11%) wanted a future pregnancy, and 275 (16%) were unsure; 182 (11%) felt “at risk” for an unintended pregnancy. Discussion: TGE people in the United States plan for pregnancy, experience pregnancy (intended and unintended) and all pregnancy outcomes, and are engaged in family building. Sexual and reproductive health clinicians and counselors should avoid assumptions about pregnancy capacity or intentions based on a patient’s presumed or stated gender or engagement with gender-affirming hormone therapy

Abortion attempts without clinical supervision among transgender, nonbinary and gender-expansive people in the United States

Background Transgender, nonbinary and gender-expansive (TGE) people face barriers to abortion care and may consider abortion without clinical supervision. Methods In 2019, we recruited participants for an online survey about sexual and reproductive health. Eligible participants were TGE people assigned female or intersex at birth, 18 years and older, from across the United States, and recruited through The PRIDE Study or via online and in-person postings. Results Of 1694 TGE participants, 76 people (36% of those ever pregnant) reported considering trying to end a pregnancy on their own without clinical supervision, and a subset of these (n=40; 19% of those ever pregnant) reported attempting to do so. Methods fell into four broad categories: herbs (n=15, 38%), physical trauma (n=10, 25%), vitamin C (n=8, 20%) and substance use (n=7, 18%). Reasons given for abortion without clinical supervision ranged from perceived efficiency and desire for privacy, to structural issues including a lack of health insurance coverage, legal restrictions, denials of or mistreatment within clinical care, and cost. Conclusions These data highlight a high proportion of sampled TGE people who have attempted abortion without clinical supervision. This could reflect formidable barriers to facility-based abortion care as well as a strong desire for privacy and autonomy in the abortion process. Efforts are needed to connect TGE people with information on safe and effective methods of self-managed abortion and to dismantle barriers to clinical abortion care so that TGE people may freely choose a safe, effective abortion in either setting

Reports of Negative Interactions with Healthcare Providers among Transgender, Nonbinary, and Gender-Expansive People assigned Female at Birth in the United States: Results from an Online, Cross-Sectional Survey

Over one million people in the United States are transgender, nonbinary, or gender expansive (TGE). TGE individuals, particularly those who have pursued gender-affirming care, often need to disclose their identities in the process of seeking healthcare. Unfortunately, TGE individuals often report negative experiences with healthcare providers (HCPs). We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of 1684 TGE people assigned female or intersex at birth in the United States to evaluate the quality of their healthcare experiences. Most respondents (70.1%, n = 1180) reported at least one negative interaction with an HCP in the past year, ranging from an unsolicited harmful opinion about gender identity to physical attacks and abuse. In an adjusted logistic regression model, those who had pursued gender-affirming medical care (51.9% of the sample, n = 874) had 8.1 times the odds (95% CI: 4.1-17.1) of reporting any negative interaction with an HCP in the past year, compared to those who had not pursued gender-affirming care, and tended to report a higher number of such negative interactions. These findings suggest that HCPs are failing to create safe, high-quality care interactions for TGE populations. Improving care quality and reducing bias is crucial for improving the health and well-being of TGE people

Development of an affirming and customizable electronic survey of sexual and reproductive health experiences for transgender and gender nonbinary people

To address pervasive measurement biases in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) research, our interdisciplinary team created an affirming, customizable electronic survey to measure experiences with contraceptive use, pregnancy, and abortion for transgender and gender nonbinary people assigned female or intersex at birth and cisgender sexual minority women. Between May 2018 and April 2019, we developed a questionnaire with 328 items across 10 domains including gender identity; language used for sexual and reproductive anatomy and events; gender affirmation process history; sexual orientation and sexual activity; contraceptive use and preferences; pregnancy history and desires; abortion history and preferences; priorities for sexual and reproductive health care; family building experiences; and sociodemographic characteristics. Recognizing that the words people use for their sexual and reproductive anatomy can vary, we programmed the survey to allow participants to input the words they use to describe their bodies, and then used those customized words to replace traditional medical terms throughout the survey. This process-oriented paper aims to describe the rationale for and collaborative development of an affirming, customizable survey of the SRH needs and experiences of sexual and gender minorities, and to present summary demographic characteristics of 3,110 people who completed the survey. We also present data on usage of customizable words, and offer the full text of the survey, as well as code for programming the survey and cleaning the data, for others to use directly or as guidelines for how to measure SRH outcomes with greater sensitivity to gender diversity and a range of sexual orientations