Cargando…

The Dobbs Decision and the Future of Occupational Health in the US

Access to abortion care has a profound impact on women’s ability to participate in the workforce. In the US, restrictions on abortion care have waxed and waned over the years, including periods when abortion was broadly permitted across the nation for most pregnant people for a substantial proportio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bergman, Mindy E., Gaskins, Vanessa A., Allen, Tammy, Cheung, Ho Kwan, Hebl, Mikki, King, Eden B., Sinclair, Robert R., Siuta, Rose L., Wolfe, Corrine, Zelin, Alexandra I.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9940085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36843836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41542-023-00143-1
_version_ 1784891005508517888
author Bergman, Mindy E.
Gaskins, Vanessa A.
Allen, Tammy
Cheung, Ho Kwan
Hebl, Mikki
King, Eden B.
Sinclair, Robert R.
Siuta, Rose L.
Wolfe, Corrine
Zelin, Alexandra I.
author_facet Bergman, Mindy E.
Gaskins, Vanessa A.
Allen, Tammy
Cheung, Ho Kwan
Hebl, Mikki
King, Eden B.
Sinclair, Robert R.
Siuta, Rose L.
Wolfe, Corrine
Zelin, Alexandra I.
author_sort Bergman, Mindy E.
collection PubMed
description Access to abortion care has a profound impact on women’s ability to participate in the workforce. In the US, restrictions on abortion care have waxed and waned over the years, including periods when abortion was broadly permitted across the nation for most pregnant people for a substantial proportion of pregnancy and times when restrictions varied across states, including states where abortion is banned for nearly all reasons. Additionally, access to abortion care has always been a reproductive justice issue, with some people more able to access this care than others even when it is structurally available. In June 2022, the US Supreme Court handed down the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, returning to states the ability to determine restrictions on abortion, including near-total bans on abortion. In this anthology, ten experts share their perspectives on what the Dobbs decision means for the future, how it will exacerbate existing, well-researched issues, and likely also create new challenges needing investigation. Some contributions are focused on research directions, some focus on implications for organizations, and most include both. All contributions share relevant occupational health literature and describe the effects of the Dobbs decision in context.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9940085
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99400852023-02-21 The Dobbs Decision and the Future of Occupational Health in the US Bergman, Mindy E. Gaskins, Vanessa A. Allen, Tammy Cheung, Ho Kwan Hebl, Mikki King, Eden B. Sinclair, Robert R. Siuta, Rose L. Wolfe, Corrine Zelin, Alexandra I. Occup Health Sci Review Article Access to abortion care has a profound impact on women’s ability to participate in the workforce. In the US, restrictions on abortion care have waxed and waned over the years, including periods when abortion was broadly permitted across the nation for most pregnant people for a substantial proportion of pregnancy and times when restrictions varied across states, including states where abortion is banned for nearly all reasons. Additionally, access to abortion care has always been a reproductive justice issue, with some people more able to access this care than others even when it is structurally available. In June 2022, the US Supreme Court handed down the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, returning to states the ability to determine restrictions on abortion, including near-total bans on abortion. In this anthology, ten experts share their perspectives on what the Dobbs decision means for the future, how it will exacerbate existing, well-researched issues, and likely also create new challenges needing investigation. Some contributions are focused on research directions, some focus on implications for organizations, and most include both. All contributions share relevant occupational health literature and describe the effects of the Dobbs decision in context. Springer International Publishing 2023-02-20 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9940085/ /pubmed/36843836 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41542-023-00143-1 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Review Article
Bergman, Mindy E.
Gaskins, Vanessa A.
Allen, Tammy
Cheung, Ho Kwan
Hebl, Mikki
King, Eden B.
Sinclair, Robert R.
Siuta, Rose L.
Wolfe, Corrine
Zelin, Alexandra I.
The Dobbs Decision and the Future of Occupational Health in the US
title The Dobbs Decision and the Future of Occupational Health in the US
title_full The Dobbs Decision and the Future of Occupational Health in the US
title_fullStr The Dobbs Decision and the Future of Occupational Health in the US
title_full_unstemmed The Dobbs Decision and the Future of Occupational Health in the US
title_short The Dobbs Decision and the Future of Occupational Health in the US
title_sort dobbs decision and the future of occupational health in the us
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9940085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36843836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41542-023-00143-1
work_keys_str_mv AT bergmanmindye thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT gaskinsvanessaa thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT allentammy thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT cheunghokwan thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT heblmikki thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT kingedenb thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT sinclairrobertr thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT siutarosel thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT wolfecorrine thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT zelinalexandrai thedobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT bergmanmindye dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT gaskinsvanessaa dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT allentammy dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT cheunghokwan dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT heblmikki dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT kingedenb dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT sinclairrobertr dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT siutarosel dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT wolfecorrine dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus
AT zelinalexandrai dobbsdecisionandthefutureofoccupationalhealthintheus