[The Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade was a blow to
reproductive rights. But fortunately, new data suggest that most of
those seeking abortions still seem to be getting them.]
[[link removed]]

EVEN AFTER DOBBS, ABORTIONS STILL HAVEN’T PLUMMETED  
[[link removed]]


 

Matt Bruenig
December 1, 2022
Jacobin
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ The Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade was a blow to
reproductive rights. But fortunately, new data suggest that most of
those seeking abortions still seem to be getting them. _

A view of the medical bed and the procedure room where abortions once
took place, inside Tulsa Women's Clinic, in Tulsa, Oklahoma, U.S. June
20, 2022. Picture taken June 20, 2022. , REUTERS/Liliana Salgado

 

The strategy of the institutional antiabortion movement over the last
fifty years has been to overturn the Supreme Court’s creation of a
constitutional right to abortion and then change the state laws that
govern the practice of abortion so as to make them more strict. This
strategy was nominally aimed at reducing the number of abortions in
the United States, but antiabortion movement leaders have seemed
[[link removed]] largely uninterested
in the question of how much it would actually do that.

We recently got some initial answers to this question, courtesy of an
impressive data collection effort
[[link removed]] undertaken
by the Society of Family Planning (SFP). In April of this year, prior
to the _Dobbs_ decision overturning the constitutional right to an
abortion, the SFP began collecting monthly data from 79 percent of
abortion providers in the country. With this data, they have been able
to estimate the number of abortions being conducted in each state
every month between April and August of this year.

There are two main reasons to doubt that the overturn-then-restrict
strategy of the antiabortion movement would make much of a dent in the
number of abortions being conducted in the United States.

The first reason is that most of the population lives in states that
are not likely to impose significant restrictions. The SFP data
confirms this. Prior to _Dobbs_, 10 percent of US abortions occurred
in states that went on to ban abortion, 16 percent occurred in states
that went on to significantly restrict abortion, and the remaining 74
percent occurred in states that have not imposed significant
restrictions.

The second reason is that abortion seekers have three ways of
getting an abortion: 1) through a formal provider in their own state,
2) through a formal provider in another state, and 3) informally, such
as by acquiring mifepristone or misoprostol without a prescription.
Yet state laws can only really restrict the first option. When that
option is closed down, many abortion seekers will opt for travel or
informal methods.

The SFP data partially confirms that this is happening. Between April
and August of this year, the number of abortions in states with bans
or significant restrictions declined by 12,500 per month, while the
number of abortions increased by 7,140 in states without significant
restrictions.

From this, we can see that most abortion seekers who are affected by
bans or restrictions in their own states still get an abortion by
traveling to another state.

After accounting for the increase in abortion in nonrestrictive
states, the total abortion reduction from April to August is only
5,360 per month, which is equal to around 6 percent of
pre-_Dobbs_ abortions. And many of those 5,360 missing abortions
probably did occur through informal methods, like abortion pills
acquired without a prescription, that escape this kind of tracking.

So, in the final score, the overturn-then-restrict policy strategy of
a fifty-year-old generational struggle accomplished less than 6
percent of its nominal goal, a number that is likely to decline
further as information about travel and pill alternatives becomes more
widespread. For comparison, the number of annual abortions declined
[[link removed]] by
over 40 percent in the thirty years prior to _Dobbs_.

_MATT BRUENIG is the founder of People’s Policy Project
[[link removed]]._

_Subscribe to JACOBIN today [[link removed]], get
four beautiful editions a year, and help JACOBIN build a real,
socialist alternative to billionaire media._

* abortion
[[link removed]]
* Roe v. Wade
[[link removed]]
* Dobbs v. Jackson
[[link removed]]
* ultra-right
[[link removed]]
* health
[[link removed]]
* Women
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]