State-Mandated (Mis)Information and Women's Endorsement of Common Abortion Myths

Abstract

PurposeThe extent that state-mandated informed consent scripts affect women's knowledge about abortion is unknown. We examine women's endorsement of common abortion myths before and after receiving state-mandated information that included accurate and inaccurate statements about abortion. MethodsIn Utah, women presenting for an abortion information visit completed baseline surveys (n = 494) and follow-up interviews 3 weeks later (n = 309). Women answered five items about abortion risks, indicating which of two statements was closer to the truth (as established by prior research) or responding “don't know.” We developed a continuous myth endorsement scale (range, 0–1) and, using multivariable regression models, examined predictors of myth endorsement at baseline and change in myth endorsement from baseline to follow-up. ResultsAt baseline, many women reported not knowing about abortion risks (range, 36%–70% across myths). Women who were younger, non-White, and had previously given birth but not had a prior abortion reported higher myth endorsement at baseline. Overall, myth endorsement decreased after the information visit (0.37–0.31; p < .001). However, endorsement of the myth that was included in the state script—describing inaccurate risks of depression and anxiety—increased at follow-up (0.47–0.52; p < .05). ConclusionsLack of knowledge about the effects of abortion is common. Knowledge of information that was accurately presented or not referenced in state-mandated scripts increased. In contrast, inaccurate information was associated with decreases in women's knowledge about abortion, violating accepted principles of informed consent. State policies that require or result in the provision of inaccurate information should be reconsidered.