Author(s): Gary Hayden Lai
Mentor(s): Rachel Arocho
Institution UVU
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of “Roe v. Wade” in 2022, reproductive healthcare rights have become contentious. The legality and accessibility of fertility options vary considerably from state to state, leaving families uncertain about their options. Amidst conflicting political promises, families potentially face misinformation, uncertainty, and mistrust (m.u.m) surrounding abortion and in-vitro fertilization (IVF). This study aims to explore how m.u.m about fertility could be associated with delays in family formation and fertility decisions, specifically by reviewing the development and performance of a measure of m.u.m administered through a survey in November of 2024 (n = 202), through convenience sampling in Utah Valley, with a second wave forthcoming in early February of 2025. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) will be used to assess measurement qualities including internal reliability and factor loadings to understand if distinct latent variables (LVs) of ‘misinformation’ (LV 1), ‘uncertainty’ (LV 2), and ‘mistrust’ (LV 3) can be detected within the data. If distinct variables can be identified, additional tests will help show if the measure behaves similarly for different groups such as ‘men vs. women’, ‘married vs. unmarried’ participants, or those along the political spectrum; and how they mediate the impact of the LVs on family decision-making and timing. In addition to utilizing the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) framework to guide the interpretation of the SEM to support any preliminary hypotheses (such as elevated levels of m.u.m being negatively associated with family formation attitudes), a separate experiment was incorporated into the survey design to ascertain if respondents’ attitudes varied when presented with questions about abortion and IVF in a side-by-side matrix style versus being presented as separate questions. Further analysis aims to reveal whether presentation format influences any perceived similarity of these fertility procedures, elucidating how differences in narrative framing could shape public attitudes. If m.u.m can be reliably measured as separate variables, policymakers and healthcare providers can design targeted interventions to address hesitant attitudes toward family building by combating misinformation about abortion and IVF. Findings could also inform survey methodologies by highlighting how question framing impacts attitudes toward reproductive choices. Ultimately, being able to isolate and measure variables such as m.u.m around fertility is important for reducing social uncertainties in a national landscape where reproductive rights are increasingly fragmented and reproductive options are in constant flux, especially when they could potentially influence family planning and overall fertility rates.