Rethinking "Elective" Procedures for Women's Reproduction during Covid-19

Area of Science:

• Reproductive Health
• Gender Studies
• Public Health Policy

Background:

• Hospitals restricted "elective" procedures during Covid-19, prioritizing physical health and survival.
• This narrow focus overlooked procedures benefiting well-being beyond health, such as self-determination and social relationships.
• Female reproductive procedures were broadly, and problematically, categorized as "elective".

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze the impact of classifying female reproductive procedures as "elective" during the Covid-19 pandemic.
• To argue that these restrictions perpetuate gender injustice by marginalizing women's rights and interests.
• To propose an individualized framework for triaging reproductive procedures.

Main Methods:

• Qualitative analysis of hospital pandemic responses.
• Examination of the societal and individual impacts of reproductive procedure restrictions.
• Development of a proposed triage framework.

Main Results:

• Categorization of reproductive procedures as "elective" disproportionately deprioritized women's well-being.
• Restrictions on abortion, sterilization, contraception, and IVF reflect and propagate gender marginalization.
• Current triage models fail to account for the comprehensive value of reproductive healthcare.

Conclusions:

• The "elective" label for reproductive procedures inadequately reflects their importance for women's overall well-being.
• Pandemic-related restrictions on these procedures exacerbate gender injustice.
• An individualized, well-being-focused triage framework is crucial for equitable reproductive healthcare during crises.