Liana Woskie and Kimberly Turner's excellent new @theconversation.com piece draws on "From Relf v. Weinberger to Drive-Through Delivery: Unpacking Democratic Responsiveness & Administrative Levers in US Sterilization Policy."
read.dukeupress.edu/jhppl/articl...
theconversation.com/reduced-heal...
@mirandayaver.bsky.social & @mshepruralpolitics.bsky.social interviewed @mattmotta.bsky.social @thcallaghan.bsky.social & @klunztrujillo.bsky.social on their article "Public Risk Perceptions & Policy Attitudes Toward Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza." Check it out! on.soundcloud.com/JysieKBuo450...
As they emphasize in The Conversation, "Sterilization is not inherently good or bad. It is a highly effective and often desired form of permanent contraception. That matters now more than ever" given the Dobbs fallout (--> more permanent contraception). For more: read.dukeupress.edu/jhppl/articl...
Changes in how healthcare is managed have had a meaningful effect on what contraceptive options are available to women.
theconversation.com
Listen to JHPPL Interview with Matt Motta, Tim Callaghan, and Kristin Lunz Trujillo by Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law #np on #SoundCloud
They ultimately find that public outrage and litigation did not produce sweeping changes in the national sterilization rates, while 1990s payment reforms toward cost containment were associated with a sustained national decline, finding significant interplay in influence of courts and financing.
In their JHPPL article, they assess the dual legacies of sterilization - from safe & effective contraception to coercion by the state. Probing what changed sterilization practices over time, they analyze harmonized panel of contraceptive surveys from 190 nations spanning the years 1965-2010.