Health Care Analysis 30 (1):73-96 (2022)

Authors
Abstract
Access to abortion care has been hugely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This has prompted several governments to permit the use of telemedicine for fully remote care pathways, thereby ensuring pregnant people are still able to access services. One such government is that of England, where these new care pathways have been publicly scrutinised. Those opposed to telemedical early medical abortion care have raised myriad concerns, though they largely centre on matters of patient safeguarding. It is argued that healthcare professionals cannot adequately carry out their safeguarding duties if the patient is not in the room with them. These concerns lack empirical support. Emerging evidence suggests that safeguarding processes may, in fact, be more effective within telemedical abortion care pathways. In this article, we address two specific safeguarding concerns: that a remote consultation prevents a healthcare professional from identifying instances of abuse, and that healthcare professionals cannot reliably confirm the absence of coercion during a remote consultation. We demonstrate that such concerns are misplaced, and that safeguarding may actually be improved in telemedical care pathways as victims of abuse may find it easier to engage with services. It is inevitable that some individuals will fall through the net, but this is unavoidable even with in-person care and thus does not constitute a strong critique of the use of telemedicine in abortion care. These safeguarding concerns set aside, then, we argue that the current approval that enables telemedical early medical abortion should be afforded permanence.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10728-021-00439-9
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,008
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Telemedical Imperative.Jordan A. Parsons - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (4):298-306.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Abortion, Society, and the Law. Edited by David F. Walbert & J. Douglas Butler.David F. Walbert - 1973 - Cleveland [Ohio]Press of Case Western Reserve University.
Ethics Briefings.M. Davies, S. Brannan, E. Chrispin, V. English, R. Mussell, J. Sheather & A. Sommerville - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (5):321-323.
The Moral Significance of Spontaneous Abortion.T. F. Murphy - 1985 - Journal of Medical Ethics 11 (2):79-83.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-10-24

Total views
5 ( #1,202,935 of 2,505,176 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,705 of 2,505,176 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes