Abstract:
In the United States, travel is a fact of the abortion care provision landscape. This is largely due to the uneven geographical distribution of providers and state-level gestational duration bans that constrain what abortion care is available locally. When abortion travel is compelled by legal restriction, it is forced travel. Research has comprehensively documented that forced abortion travel is burdensome; people who must travel for abortion experience financial, logistical, and emotional burdens. Generally overlooked, however, is variation in the experience of travel-related burdens and whether and how such burdens can be reduced. Given current political hostility to abortion, the number of people who must travel and the distances they must travel for abortion are likely to grow, making the question of how travel-related burdens can be reduced in the absence of policy change of increasing relevance. Using thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 30 cisgender women in the United States who were forced to travel to obtain third-trimester abortion care, I identify three ways that the burdens of forced abortion travel can be mitigated without policy change: prompt referrals; financial and practical support for travel; and emotional support. In some instances, respondents experienced the received emotional support as so valuable as to offset the other burdens of travel, pointing to the possibility that some people might prefer to travel for abortion care whether or not they are forced to do so. Respondents also reported unexpected positive aspects of traveling, including experiences of kindness and human connection, underscoring that not all aspects of abortion travel are negative. Findings thicken our understanding of forced abortion travel and identify structural and interpersonal practices that can reduce the associated burdens, complementing legal and policy-oriented critiques of legal regulation that makes abortion travel necessary.