Skip to main content
Guttmacher Institute

Search

  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Highlights

  • Roe v. Wade Overturned
  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • State legislation tracker

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Data, Videos & Visualizations

  • Data center
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Public-use data sets

Peer-reviewed Journals

  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • 2024 Impact Report

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
Guttmacher Institute
Donate

Highlights

  • Roe v. Wade Overturned
  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • State legislation tracker

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Data, Videos & Visualizations

  • Data center
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Public-use data sets

Peer-reviewed Journals

  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • 2024 Impact Report

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact
News Release
February 19, 2016

Teens Seeking Family Planning Services Face Inconsistent Privacy Standards in Federally Qualified Health Centers

Confidentiality is a top priority for many teens accessing family planning services, but organizational practices to ensure patient privacy are implemented unevenly at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), which serve as safety net health care providers for low-income and medically underserved populations, including youth. According to "Privacy and Confidentiality Practices in Adolescent Family Planning Care at Federally Qualified Health Centers," by Tishra Beeson, of Central Washington University, et al., barriers to implementing privacy practices at these health centers include a lack of clear guidelines or protocols for providing confidential services to teens and confusion among staff about state laws requiring minors’ consent.

The authors analyzed survey data collected in 2011 from 423 FQHCs to determine the prevalence of five organizational practices meant to ensure confidentiality for adolescent patients. They examined the data for relationships between use of confidentiality practices and organizational characteristics of the health centers (including size, location, state policy climate and receipt of Title X funding). Researchers also conducted in-depth interviews with staff at six FQHCs to provide additional context to the survey data.

Among the 329 health centers that provided all relevant data, 93% employed at least one of the confidentiality measures covered in the survey, and 59% used three or more. However, only 5% used all of the practices. The most commonly employed measures were providing information to patients regarding adolescents’ right to privacy (81% of respondents) and limiting access to family planning and medical records to the patient and other formally designated individuals (84%). The least common measure (10%) was maintaining separate medical records for family planning. FQHCs that had the largest patient volumes used more confidentiality practices than ones with the smallest caseloads, and Title X–funded centers employed more of these practices than centers that did not receive Title X support. Interviews with health center staff revealed that Title X–funded centers provided specific staff training on patient confidentiality and had built-in protocols to ensure privacy for teen patients.

Previous studies have shown that teens are particularly likely to delay or avoid discussing sensitive health topics or returning for follow-up care when they do not trust that their private information is protected. Beeson et al. note that the absence of established protocols to ensure patient confidentiality may compromise teens’ privacy, potentially leading young people to avoid seeking medical care. They recommend that the Health Resources and Services Administration (the agency that oversees the FQHC program) develop guidelines and standards to ensure patient confidentiality at all FQHCs. The authors suggest that further research might solicit information from patients as well as service providers. They also note that additional research is needed to assess the impact of the Affordable Care Act on teens’ ability to access confidential family planning services.

"Privacy and Confidentiality Practices in Adolescent Family Planning Care at Federally Qualified Health Centers," by Tishra Beeson, of Central Washington University, et al., is currently available online in Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health.

Printer-friendly version

Share

Read More

Research Article

Privacy and Confidentiality Practices In Adolescent Family Planning Care At Federally Qualified Health Centers

Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health

Topic

United States

  • Teens

Region

  • Northern America: United States

Tags

confidentiality
Guttmacher Institute

Center facts. Shape policy.
Advance sexual and reproductive rights.

Donate Now
Newsletter Signup  Contact Us 
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Footer

  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility Statement
© 2025 Guttmacher Institute. The Guttmacher Institute is registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization under the tax identification number 13-2890727. Contributions are tax deductible to the fullest extent allowable.