Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2020 Nov 2;3(11):e2024610.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.24610.

Association of Highly Restrictive State Abortion Policies With Abortion Rates, 2000-2014

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Association of Highly Restrictive State Abortion Policies With Abortion Rates, 2000-2014

Benjamin P Brown et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Although abortion is common in the United States, patients face substantial barriers to obtaining an abortion. Recently enacted abortion restrictions pose such barriers.

Objectives: To assess the association between a state legislative climate that is highly restrictive toward abortion provision and the abortion rate and to evaluate whether distance to a facility providing abortion care mediates the association between legislative climate and the abortion rate.

Design, setting, and participants: This cohort study examined county-of-residence abortion rates from all states that publicly provided them and used data on abortion restrictions, facility locations, and county demographic characteristics for the years 2000 to 2014. The association between legislative climate and abortion rates was evaluated using propensity score-weighted, linear regression difference-in-difference analysis. All models included state and year fixed effects and standard errors adjusted for state-level clustering.

Exposures: Highly restrictive legislative climate, defined as having at least 3 of 4 types of abortion restrictions; distance to a high-volume facility providing abortion care (ie, performing ≥395 abortions per year) in miles.

Main outcomes and measures: County-level abortion rate, defined as abortions per 1000 women per year.

Results: Abortion rate data were obtained from 1178 counties in 18 states for a median of 12.5 years (range, 5-14). The median abortion rate was 2.89 per 1000 women (interquartile range, 1.71-4.46 per 1000 women). A highly restrictive legislative climate, when compared with a less restrictive one, was associated with 0.48 fewer abortions per 1000 women (95% CI, -0.92 to -0.04 abortions per 1000 women; P = .03). Adjusted for distance to a facility providing abortion care, a highly restrictive legislative climate was associated with 0.44 fewer abortions per 1000 women (95% CI, -0.85 to -0.03; P = .04). Each mile to a facility was associated with 0.02 fewer abortions per 1000 women (95% CI, -0.03 to -0.01 abortions per 1000 women; P = .003). Legislative climate was not significantly associated with distance to a facility providing abortion care (change in distance associated with highly restrictive climate, -2.73 [95% CI, -6.02 to 0.57] miles; P = .10).

Conclusions and relevance: This study provides evidence that a state legislative climate that is highly restrictive toward abortion provision is associated with a lower abortion rate. The cumulative effect of restrictive policies may pose a barrier to abortion access.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Brown reported receiving per diem fees for clinical services from Planned Parenthood of Southern New England outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. Difference in Abortions per 1000 Women Before and After Introduction of Highly Restrictive Legislative Climate
Error bars indicate 95% CIs for each point estimate. A highly restrictive legislative climate was defined as a state that instituted abortion restrictions in 3 or more of 4 major categories of laws. The year before introduction of a highly restrictive climate was excluded as the baseline year. The model employed propensity score weighting, state and year fixed effects, and cluster-robust standard errors.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Jones RK, Jerman J. Population group abortion rates and lifetime incidence of abortion: United States, 2008-2014. Am J Public Health. 2017;107(12):1904-1909. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2017.304042 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Guttmacher Institute Last five years account for more than one-quarter of all abortion restrictions enacted since Roe. Published March 18, 2016. Accessed July 1, 2020. https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2016/01/last-five-years-account-more-...
    1. Nash E, Gold RB, Ansari-Thomas A, Cappello O, Mohammed L. Laws affecting reproductive health and rights: state trends at midyear, 2016. Guttmacher Institute Published July 21, 2016. Accessed July 1, 2020. https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2016/07/laws-affecting-reproductive-h...
    1. Nash E, Mohammed L, Cappello O, Naide S. State policy trends 2019: a wave of abortion bans, but some states are fighting back. Guttmacher Institute Published December 10, 2019. Accessed July 1, 2020. https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2019/12/state-policy-trends-2019-wave...
    1. Gerdts C, Fuentes L, Grossman D, et al. . Impact of clinic closures on women obtaining abortion services after implementation of a restrictive law in Texas. Am J Public Health. 2016;106(5):857-864. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2016.303134 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms