Search

In 2020, the New Zealand (NZ) Parliament voted to decriminalise abortion. Although NZ's abortion law formally opposes sex selective abortions, there is considerable complexity in the gender politics of 'choice' and 'agency' in multi-ethnic societies, and interpretations of reproductive rights for ethnic minority women and for the girl child, respectively. This paper explores these complexities through the perspectives of reproductive and maternity care practitioners who are situated at the interface of legal systems, health service provision, and delivery of culturally sensitive care. Thirteen practitioners were interviewed as part of this study. The analysis highlights strains in framings of 'reproductive choice' (underpinned by western liberal notions of rights) and 'gender equality' (abortion rights that acknowledge the complexity of cultural son-preference) for ethnic minority women. These tensions are played out in three aspects of the post-reform landscape: (a) everyday practice and accountability; (b) consumerism and choice; (c) custodianship and gender rights. The findings point to the limitations in operationalising choices for ethnic women in health systems wherein trust deficit prevails, and cultural dynamics render complex responses to abortion. They also highlight reconfigurations of client-expert relationships that may have implications for practitioners' abilities to advocate for ethnic women's rights against cultural influences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research and clinical outcomes that matter to people with lived experience can significantly differ from those outcomes studied by researchers. To inform a future Cochrane review of suicide and self‐harm prevention interventions, we aimed to work with young people with relevant lived experience to agree on priority outcomes. Design: Four participatory codesign workshops were completed across two sites (New Zealand, United Kingdom) with 28 young people in total. We iteratively adapted the methods over the course of the study. Results: 'Improved coping' and 'safer/more accepting environment to disclose' were the final top‐rated outcomes. 'Reduction of self‐harm' was considered a low priority as it could be misleading, stigmatizing and was considered a secondary consequence of other improvements. In contrast to typical research outcomes, young people emphasized the diversity of experience, the dynamic nature of improvement and holistic and asset‐based framing. Methodologically, dialogue using design materials (personas) to thematically explore outcomes was effective in overcoming the initial challenge of disparate quantitative ratings. Discussion: The results will directly inform the development of a Cochrane review, enabling identification of whether and how outcomes of most importance to young people are measured in trials. Rather than producing discrete measurable outcomes that could be easily added to the systematic review, the young people challenged the academic conceptualization of outcomes, with implications for future evidence synthesis and intervention research, and for future codesign. Patient or Public Contribution: Young people with lived experience were codesigners of the outcomes, and their feedback informed iterative changes to the study methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]