Supporting All Patients With Unintended Pregnancies: Implications for Health Equity

Andrea Westby, MD
Ebiere Okah, MD, MS
Katy Backes Kozhimmanil, PhD, MPA

American Family Physician. 2025;111(5):391-392.

Author disclosure: No relevant financial relationships.

Unintended pregnancies can negatively affect financial, health, educational, and social outcomes. Reproductive justice is a health equity imperative that entails the right to have or not have children, and to parent children with autonomy and personal agency.1 Fully supporting patients who have unintended pregnancies is increasingly urgent, especially for those with marginalized identities. A previously published American Family Physician (AFP) article describes evidence-based management of unintended pregnancies for family physicians.2 We aim to highlight the implications for health equity.

Racial and ethnic minorities; patients who are immigrants, economically disadvantaged, disabled, or gender diverse; and those in rural communities have limited access to family planning and contraceptive counseling. This, along with a legacy of white supremacy, settler colonialism, and economic exploitation, contributes to higher rates of unintended pregnancies.37 In the United States, there has been a long history of reproductive coercion in Black, Indigenous, and Hispanic communities, ranging from forced sterilization to unethical birth control experiments.6,8 Additionally, racially marginalized populations encounter greater interpersonal and systemic discrimination, which may lead to reduced engagement with and trust in the health care system.9 Black, Hispanic, and lower-income women have been steered toward particular contraceptive methods and have experienced coercive contraceptive counseling practices.10 Even well-intentioned efforts to reduce unintended pregnancies through multiple inquiries about contraceptive use and directing patients to long-acting contraceptives can create disrespectful interactions and reduce autonomy in family planning.

Although unintended pregnancies can have harmful consequences for patients, not all unintended pregnancies are unwanted or undesired. Considering whether to continue an unintended pregnancy requires a complex calculus that includes the policy environment (eg, protections, supports, and benefits for birthing people and families) and potential effects on physical, mental, and emotional health for pregnant patients and their families. Black, Indigenous, lower-income, and rural-residing people are at an increased risk for maternal morbidity and mortality, and the declining access to high-quality and culturally centered care further exacerbates these risks.6 Compared with intended pregnancy, unintended pregnancy leads to a higher risk of perinatal depression, interpersonal violence, and infant low birth weight and almost doubles the risk for preterm delivery.11,12 Preterm birth is a leading cause of infant mortality, and infant mortality rates are higher for Black and Indigenous populations, people of color, and rural residents in the United States.13

Beyond health, there are potential impacts on financial stability, employment, and career trajectory because pregnancies (intended and unintended) in the United States are often accompanied by financial stress.14,15 Adoption is an option; however, it results in family separation, which is a traumatic historical and contemporary reality that disproportionately affects Black, Indigenous, and immigrant people in the United States.16

For those who cannot or choose not to carry an unintended pregnancy to term, access to abortion care is an essential aspect of health equity and racial and economic justice.6 Recent estimates suggest that a nationwide abortion ban would increase maternal mortality by 21% overall and by 33% in Black patients.17 The effects of restricting abortion access would likely extend beyond maternal mortality. In a landmark analysis of outcomes among pregnant people who sought an abortion, those denied abortion access were less likely to have an aspirational life plan, and those who had an aspirational life plan were less likely to achieve it.18

Through clinical care and influencing policies in the health care system, primary care clinicians can reduce the inequitable impacts of unintended pregnancies. The first step is to implement patient-centered contraceptive counseling using a reproductive justice lens, including focusing on the patient’s sexual and reproductive health goals and using shared decision-making based on their values, lived experiences, and preferences, as described in the previous AFP article.2,19 Additionally, by learning about and reckoning with the legacy of medical racism, clinicians can take steps to mitigate its effects on care, such as reevaluating tools that inappropriately reduce access to vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.20 In administrative and leadership roles, clinicians can advocate for health care policies and payment systems that ensure access to high-quality, evidence-based, patient-centered care for all people, including the full range of reproductive care.2

Family physicians have a role beyond clinical care for patients with unintended pregnancies. Advocating for expanding the social safety net to reduce the negative financial and social impacts of pregnancy and parenting (eg, affordable childcare; paid parental and family medical leave; a living wage; safe, affordable housing; access to affordable, nutritious food) sets the foundation for health equity and reproductive justice.

ANDREA WESTBY, MD, FAAFP, and EBIERE OKAH, MD, MS, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis

KATY BACKES KOZHIMMANIL, PhD, MPA, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis

Address correspondence to Andrea Westby, MD, FAAFP, at andrea.l.westby@gmail.com.

Author disclosure: No relevant financial relationships.

  1. 1.Ross LJ, Solinger R. Reproductive Justice: An Introduction. University of California Press; 2017.
  2. 2.Valerio C, Norby M, Kremsreiter P. Options for unintended pregnancies. Am Fam Physician. 2025;111(4):352-360.
  3. 3.Jackson AV, Wang LF, Morse J. Racial and ethnic differences in contraception use and obstetric outcomes: a review. Semin Perinatol. 2017;41(5):273-277.
  4. 4.McCall-Hosenfeld JS, Weisman CS. Receipt of preventive counseling among reproductive-aged women in rural and urban communities. Rural Remote Health. 2011;11(1):1617.
  5. 5.Quinn DA, Sileanu FE, Zhao X, et al. History of unintended pregnancy and patterns of contraceptive use among racial and ethnic minority women veterans. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;223(4):564.e1-564.e13.
  6. 6.Kozhimannil KB, Hassan A, Hardeman RR. Abortion access as a racial justice issue. N Engl J Med. 2022;387(17):1537-1539.
  7. 7.Crear-Perry J, Hassan A, Daniel S. Advancing birth equity in a post-Dobbs US. JAMA. 2022;328(17):1689-1690.
  8. 8.American Public Health Association. Opposing coercion in contraceptive access and care to promote reproductive health equity. October 26, 2021. Accessed November 25, 2024. https://apha.org/Policies-and-Advocacy/Public-Health-Policy-Statements/Policy-Database/2022/01/07/Contraceptive-Access
  9. 9.Bailey ZD, Feldman JM, Bassett MT. How structural racism works – racist policies as a root cause of U.S. racial health inequities. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(8):768-773.
  10. 10.Kathawa CA, Arora KS. Implicit bias in counseling for permanent contraception: historical context and recommendations for counseling. Health Equity. 2020;4(1):326-329.
  11. 11.Nelson HD, Darney BG, Ahrens K, et al. Associations of unintended pregnancy with maternal and infant health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2022;328(17):1714-1729.
  12. 12.Orr ST, Miller CA, James SA, et al. Unintended pregnancy and preterm birth. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2000;14(4):309-313.
  13. 13.Vilda D, Hardeman R, Dyer L, et al. Structural racism, racial inequities and urban-rural differences in infant mortality in the US. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2021;75(8):788-793.
  14. 14.Taylor K, Compton S, Kolenic GE, et al. Financial hardship among pregnant and postpartum women in the United States, 2013 to 2018. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(10):e2132103.
  15. 15.Sandler D, Szembrot N. Maternal labor dynamics: participation, earnings, and employer changes. December 2019. Accessed November 25, 2024. https://www2.census.gov/ces/wp/2019/CES-WP-19-33.pdf
  16. 16.Sinha A. A lineage of family separation. Brooklyn Law Rev. 2022;87(2):445-500.
  17. 17.Stevenson AJ. The pregnancy-related mortality impact of a total abortion ban in the United States: a research note on increased deaths due to remaining pregnant. Demography. 2021;58(6):2019-2028.
  18. 18.Upadhyay UD, Biggs MA, Foster DG. The effect of abortion on having and achieving aspirational one-year plans. BMC Womens Health. 2015;15:102.
  19. 19.Klein DA, Williamson RL, Yocom EA. Patient-centered contraceptive counseling: a reproductive justice-informed shift to shared decision-making. Am Fam Physician. 2024;110(4):428-431.
  20. 20.O’Brien J, Clare CA. Race-based versus race-conscious medicine in obstetrics and gynecology. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2023;66(1):95-106.

Copyright © 2026 by the American Academy of Family Physicians.

This content is owned by the AAFP. A person viewing it online may make one printout of the material and may use that printout only for his or her personal, non-commercial reference. This material may not otherwise be downloaded, copied, printed, stored, transmitted or reproduced in any medium, whether now known or later invented, except as authorized in writing by the AAFP. See permissions for copyright questions and/or permission requests.