P006Canadian newspapers support mifepristone introduction for medication abortion to improve the right to health (2015–2019)

Abstract

<h3>Objectives</h3> Analysis of newspaper coverage of medication abortion during a time of evolving regulatory framework after the approval of mifepristone in Canada in 2015. <h3>Methods</h3> We conducted a content analysis of all Canadian newspaper articles on medication abortion (January 2015–November 2019) using an a priori framework including tone (pro–, neutral–, and anti–medication abortion) and thematic analysis using the World Health Organization (WHO)'s Right to Health framework. <h3>Results</h3> The majority of articles (n=402) were pro–medication abortion (67%), and only 8% of articles were anti–medication abortion. Speakers quoted in the articles were 90.7% pro–medication abortion or neutral. Mifepristone was described as fulfilling the right to health by improving abortion availability (68% of articles), accessibility (87%), acceptability (34%), and quality (19%). Only 6.2% of articles discussed personal views on abortion. <h3>Conclusions</h3> Our analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage during mifepristone introduction found an exceptionally high level of support for the removal of regulatory barriers to medication abortion. It was framed as a health issue rather than one of partisan politics. In contrast, analysis of US media (2013–2016) found that abortion was covered as a political issue, and only 5.6% of articles identified barriers to abortion access (Woodruff, 2019). Our study suggests framing abortion as a health issue can be an effective media advocacy strategy to support science-informed regulation.