Search

When a pregnancy ends in England and Wales, statutory time away from paid employment is limited to circumstances where there is a live birth or stillbirth. Forms of leave, such as Maternity Leave or Paternity Leave, depend on parental status derived from the civil registration of a new person or a post‐viability stillbirth. Other early pregnancy endings, such as miscarriage or abortion, do not provide specific time off work after pregnancy. This paper uses the concept of reproductive governance to analyze current and shifting biopolitical truth discourses, strategies of intervention, and modes of subjectification around post‐pregnancy leaves. It shows how different inclusions and exclusions are generated by the classificatory boundaries which act as political technologies in this field. Contributing to an area that is under‐researched in the literature, we provide a review of post‐pregnancy statutory employment leave entitlements in this context. We then consider proposals for change presented in the United Kingdom political system in relation to more inclusive leave benefits offered by some employers and different pregnancy ending leaves offered in other jurisdictions. We argue that current arrangements and proposals do not adequately reflect the complexity and diversity of pregnancy endings. We conclude with a call to policymakers in all contexts to carefully assess the consequences of new ideas around leaves for pregnancy endings and to formulate inclusive and fair proposals for change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare pregnancy rates and outcomes for women with cystic fibrosis in the UK with those of the general population and assess the effect of the introduction of disease‐modifying treatment. Design: A population‐based longitudinal study, 2003–17. Setting: United Kingdom. Population: Women aged 15–44 years in the UK cystic fibrosis (CF) Registry compared with women in England and Wales. Methods: We calculated pregnancy and live‐birth rates for the CF population and the general population of England and Wales. For women with CF we compared pregnancy rates before and after ivacaftor was introduced in 2013. We further used CF registry data to assess pregnancy outcomes for mothers with CF, and to assess the relationship between maternal pre‐pregnancy lung function and nutritional status and child gestational age. Main outcome measures: Pregnancy and live‐birth rates and child gestational age. Results: Of 3831 women with CF, 661 reported 818 pregnancies. Compared with the general population, the pregnancy rate was 3.3 times lower in the CF population (23.5 versus 77.7 per 1000 woman‐years); the live‐birth rate was 3.5 times lower (17.4 versus 61.4 per 1000 woman‐years) with 70% of pregnancies in CF women resulting in live births; termination of pregnancy rates were also lower (9% versus 22%). Pregnancy rates increased post‐ivacaftor for eligible women with CF, from 29.7 to 45.7 per 1000 woman‐years. There was no association between pre‐pregnancy lung function/nutrition status and gestational age. Conclusions: Pregnancy rates in women with CF are about one‐third of the rates in the general population with favourable outcomes, and increased for eligible women post‐ivacaftor. Pregnancy rates in women with CF are about a third of the rate in England and Wales with 70% live births. Ivacaftor increases the rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine contraceptive choices among women seeking termination of pregnancy (TOP) and the provision of the chosen methods.Design: Population-based study.Setting: British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) clinics in England and Wales.Population: Between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2014, 211 215 women had a TOP at BPAS, were offered contraceptive counselling, and were eligible to obtain contraception at no cost.Methods: We examined electronic records from BPAS and assessed the proportions of women who accepted contraceptive counselling and chose a contraceptive method, as well as the distributions of methods chosen, analysed by provider and by TOP type. We calculated the proportions receiving their chosen method and the methods chosen by women using no method at conception. We used logistic regression to examine the factors associated with choice of an intrauterine contraceptive (IUC) or implant.Main Outcome Measures: Post-TOP contraceptive method choice. Receipt of chosen method post-TOP.Results: Eighty-five per cent of women accepted contraceptive counselling and 51% chose to obtain a method from BPAS rather than from a GP or contraception and sexual health clinic post-TOP. [correction added on 25 November 2016 after first online publication: 51% has been inserted in the preceding sentence.] Among those who wanted to receive contraception from BPAS, 51% chose an IUC or implant and 19% chose oral contraceptives. Ninety-one per cent of women who obtained contraception from BPAS received their chosen method. Women were more likely to choose an IUC or implant if they obtained contraception from BPAS, had a surgical TOP, were parous, young, white, or had one or more previous TOPs.Conclusions: The standards set for patient-centred TOP care should emphasise the need for a full range of contraceptive options to be offered and provided post-TOP.Tweetable Abstract: Uptake targets for long-acting reversible methods do not reflect women's post-TOP contraceptive preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the quality of care provided to women undergoing induced abortion. Methods: The design was a single round audit questionnaire aimed at the providers of abortion services throughout England and Wales (NHS hospitals, clinics under NHS, agency agreements and private units. The levels of care were assessed against agreed audit criteria. Results: Responses were received from 240 (74%) of the 324 units providing abortion care in England and Wales. These units undertook 80% of the 176 000 termination procedures. Generally standards of care were appropriate, but there were clear areas for improvement including choice of method, infection screening, and delays in referral. A number of unnecessary investigations were still evident, including cross-matching, while lower doses and alternative drug regimens might reduce costs. Only half of the units audited procedures and complications. Conclusions: This audit was carried out prior to the publication of the RCOG evidence-based guideline and a further round of audit to assess the impact of the guideline should now be considered. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]