Reproductive justice on campus: Female students’ experiences seeking and accessing hormonal contraception in northern British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
,Problem: Access to hormonal contraception is a critical component of reproductive autonomy, yet structural and social barriers persist. Undergraduate students experience unique considerations around contraceptive decision-making related to service availability, campus culture, and lifestyle changes. While the implementation of universal contraception coverage in British Columbia (BC) has removed financial obstacles, the lived experiences of students indicate that challenges beyond cost remain. This study explores undergraduate students' experiences of seeking and accessing hormonal contraception in northern BC to better understand the factors shaping reproductive decision-making and service utilization. Methods: Using a feminist relational discourse analysis (FRDA) framework, this study examines the interplay between individual experiences and societal discourse to uncover power dynamics that influence contraceptive decision-making and engagement with sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with five undergraduate students from the University of Northern British Columbia (UNBC), each of whom had sought or accessed hormonal contraception from a healthcare provider within the past year. The study employed poststructuralist discourse analysis to identify recurring themes, discourses, and discursive patterns, followed by voice-centered analysis to center participant narratives within broader sociopolitical contexts. Findings: Findings reveal that participants valued reproductive agency, yet their decisions were shaped by intersecting influences, including gender norms, misinformation, patient-provider interactions, and accessibility of services. Two key discursive patterns emerged: a uterus is a credential a man cannot acquire: gender concordance as a driver of trust, which highlights students’ preference for female healthcare providers based on perceived experiential knowledge and greater empathy; and my body, my choice ... but also my responsibility: negotiating the gendered division of labour in contraception, which reflects the internalized societal expectation that pregnancy prevention is primarily the responsibility of women, despite the recognized inequity in this burden. Participants described difficulties navigating contraceptive counselling, concerns about procedural pain management, and lack of comprehensive SRH education, all of which contributed to gaps in knowledge and barriers to care. Conclusions: This study concludes that while financial access to contraception has improved with universal coverage, significant relational, educational, and systemic obstacles remain. Postsecondary institutions and healthcare systems must take proactive steps to challenge the feminization of contraceptive labour, improve SRH education, and engage in shared decision-making during contraceptive counselling. By addressing these barriers and centering the voices of contraception users, institutions can move toward genuine reproductive justice, ensuring that students have the autonomy and support to make informed decisions about their reproductive health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".