Tubal ligation in Catholic hospitals: a qualitative study of ob–gyns' experiences



      Tubal sterilization remains one of the most commonly requested contraceptive methods in the United States. Catholic hospital policy prohibits all sterilizations, but this ban is not uniformly enforced. We conducted this study to assess obstetrician–gynecologists' beliefs and experiences with tubal ligation in Catholic hospitals.

      Study design

      We interviewed 31 obstetrician–gynecologists geographically dispersed throughout the US who responded to a national survey and agreed to be contacted for a follow-up interview or who were referred by colleagues from the survey sample. Twenty-seven had experienced working in a Catholic hospital. Interviews were open ended and guided by a semistructured instrument. Transcripts were thematically analyzed.


      Obstetrician–gynecologists disagreed with strict prohibition of sterilizations, especially when denying a tubal ligation placed the patient at increased medical risk. Cesarean delivery in Catholic hospitals raised frustration for obstetrician–gynecologists when the hospital prohibited a simultaneous tubal ligation and, thus, sent the patient for an unnecessary subsequent surgery. Obstetrician–gynecologists described some hospitals allowing tubal ligations in limited circumstances, but these workarounds were vulnerable to changes in enforcement. Some obstetrician–gynecologists reported that Catholic policy posed greater barriers for low-income patients and those with insurance restrictions.


      Obstetrician–gynecologists working in Catholic hospitals in this study did not share the Church's beliefs on sterilization. Research to understand patients' experiences and knowledge of their sterilization options is warranted in order to promote women's autonomy and minimize risk of harm.

      Implications statement

      Tubal sterilization, even when medically indicated or in conjunction with cesarean delivery, is severely restricted for women delivering in Catholic hospitals. For women whose only access to hospital care is at a Catholic institution, religious policies can prevent them from receiving a desired sterilization and place them at risk for future undesired pregnancy.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Contraception
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Mosher W.D.
        • Jones J.
        Use of contraception in the United States: 1982-2008.
        Vital Health Stat 23. 2010; : 1-44
        • Westhoff C.
        Tubal sterilization: focus on the U.S. experience.
        Fertil Steril. 2000; 73: 913-922
        • Chan L.M.
        • Westhoff C.L.
        Tubal sterilization trends in the United States.
        Fertil Steril. 2010; 94: 1-6
        • Peterson H.B.
        • Xia Z.
        • Hughes J.M.
        • Wilcox L.S.
        • Tylor L.R.
        • Trussell J.
        The risk of pregnancy after tubal sterilization: findings from the U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 April; 174 (discussion 1168-70): 1161-1168
        • Hendrix N.W.
        • Chauhan S.P.
        • Morrison J.C.
        Sterilization and its consequences.
        Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1999; 54: 766-777
        • Thurman A.R.
        • Janecek T.
        One-year follow-up of women with unfulfilled postpartum sterilization requests.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 116: 1071-1077
        • Gilliam M.
        • Davis S.D.
        • Berlin A.
        • Zite N.B.
        A qualitative study of barriers to postpartum sterilization and women's attitudes toward unfulfilled sterilization requests.
        Contraception. 2008; 77: 44-49
        • Zite N.
        • Borrero S.
        Female sterilisation in the United States.
        Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2011; 16: 336-340
        • Uttley L.
        • Reynertson S.
        • Kenny L.
        • Melling L.
        Miscarriage of medicine: the growth of Catholic hospitals and the threat of reproductive health care.
        The MergerWatch Project and the American Civil Liberties Union, New York, NY2013
        • Catholic Health Association of the United States
        Catholic health care in the United States, January 2013.
        ([Accessed December 9, 2013])
        • United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
        Ethical and religious directives for catholic health care services.
        5th ed. 2009 ([ Accessed December 9, 2013])
        • Hapenney S.
        Divergent practices among Catholic hospitals in provision of direct sterilization.
        Linacre Q. 2013; 80: 32-38
        • Uttley L.
        • Pawelko R.
        No strings attached: public funding of religiously-sponsored hospitals in the United States.
        MergerWatch, Albany, NY2002
        • Stulberg D.B.
        • Dude A.M.
        • Dahlquist I.
        • Curlin F.A.
        Obstetrician-gynecologists, religious institutions, and conflicts regarding patient-care policies.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 207: 73.e1-73.e5
        • Corbin J.
        • Strauss A.
        Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory.
        Sage, 2008
        • Freedman L.R.
        • Landy U.
        • Steinauer J.
        When there's a heartbeat: miscarriage management in Catholic-owned hospitals.
        Am J Public Health. 2008; 98: 1774-1778
        • Freedman L.R.
        • Stulberg D.B.
        Conflicts in care for obstetric complications in Catholic hospitals.
        AJOB Prim Res. 2013; 4: 1-10
        • Foster A.M.
        • Dennis A.
        • Smith F.
        Do religious restrictions influence ectopic pregnancy management? A national qualitative study.
        Womens Health Issues. 2011; 21: 104-109
        • Sepper E.
        Taking conscience seriously.
        Va Law Rev. 2012; 98: 1501-1575
        • Morrison J.
        • Allekotte M.
        Duty first: towards patient-centered care and limitations on the right to refuse for moral, religious or ethical reasons.
        Ave Maria Law Rev. 2010; 9: 141-188
        • Belden Russonello & Stewart
        Religion, reproductive health and access to services: a national survey of women.
        2000 ([Washington, D.C. Accessed at February 24, 2014])
        • Salisbury C.J.
        How do people choose their doctor?.
        BMJ. 1989; 299: 608-610
        • Wun Y.T.
        • Lam T.P.
        • Lam K.F.
        • Goldberg D.
        • Li D.K.
        • Yip K.C.
        How do patients choose their doctors for primary care in a free market?.
        J Eval Clin Pract. 2010; 16: 1215-1220