The Problems with Crisis Pregnancy Centers: Reviewing the Literature and Identifying New Directions for Future Research
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S288861
2022-06-09
Abstract:Melissa N Montoya, Colleen Judge-Golden, Jonas J Swartz Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA Correspondence: Jonas J Swartz, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Duke University, DUMC, 3084, Durham, NC, 27710, USA, Tel +1 919 668 7594, Fax +1 919 681 0739, Email Crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) are nonprofit organizations that present themselves as healthcare clinics while providing counseling explicitly intended to discourage and limit access to abortion. These facilities engage in purposefully manipulative and deceptive practices that spread misinformation on sexual health and abortion. CPCs have also been shown to delay access to medically legitimate prenatal and abortion care, which negatively impacts maternal health. Along with increasing anti-abortion legislation, the proliferation of CPCs paired with the closure of abortion clinics exacerbates the ongoing harmful impact these centers have on the reproductive healthcare landscape; however, despite their growing influence, there is still limited research on patients' understanding of and experiences with CPCs. This article provides a review of academic literature on CPCs and suggests future directions for research. Ongoing scholarship may aid in improving patient awareness and education regarding CPCs, an important step toward protecting reproductive autonomy. Keywords: reproductive health, reproductive justice, abortion, advocacy Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs) are nonprofit organizations that present themselves as healthcare clinics while providing counseling explicitly intended to discourage and limit access to abortion. 1,2 These facilities, sometimes referred to as "pregnancy resource centers" or "pregnancy support centers," attract patients by offering free services such as onsite ultrasounds and STI testing; however, their primary purpose is to discourage abortion, often through manipulative and misleading tactics. 3 Most CPCs have strong ties to evangelical Christian organizations and often further their goal of religious proselytism by promoting anti-abortion and anti-contraception propaganda not supported by medical evidence. 4 CPCs often directly usurp state and federal dollars directed to reproductive health, which has helped encourage their proliferation. The first CPC in the United States opened in Hawaii in 1967, after the state legalized abortion. Today, the country has an estimated 2500–4000 operational CPCs, approximately triple the number of abortion clinics, which see over 1 million patients annually. 5 CPCs are not a strictly American phenomenon, as evidenced by the presence of these centers in at least 84 countries; however, their evolution has played an important role in shaping the political landscape of abortion in the United States. 6 In the early days of the so called pro-life movement, legal and legislative strategies aimed at restricting abortion were primarily focused on fetal rights. 7 After Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, CPCs played an important part in centering pregnant women within the pro-life movement and framing abortion as a byproduct of "an unjust system that did not value motherhood." 8 CPCs proliferated in the 1970s and 1980s as accessible spaces for primarily women volunteers to affirm their religious opposition to abortion, reinforce traditional gender expectations, and "save" other women from the harms of abortion. This ethos, which promotes strict, evangelical gender roles and positions abortion as a moral harm, remains central not only to the operation of CPCs but also to anti-choice activism more broadly. 4 The majority of CPCs are supported by religious associations such as Care Net, Heartbeat International, Birthright International, or the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates. 9 A recent study aimed at characterizing the geographic distribution of crisis pregnancy centers in the US determined that CPCs exist in every state, but are largely concentrated in the South and Midwest. 10 Evidence suggests that CPCs have a negative individual and public health impact through dissemination of medically inaccurate information and delaying access to legitimate medical care. 11 Alongside increasing anti-abortion legislation, the proliferation of CPCs paired with the closure of abortion clinics perpetuates the ongoing harmful impact these centers have on the reproductive healthcare landscape. However, despite their growing influence, there is still limited research on patients' understanding of and experiences with CPCs. In this review of the academic literature on CPCs, we explore both the impact of these centers on patient care and reproductive autonomy and suggest future directions for research. The operation of -Abstract Truncated-