The Real Cost of the Abortion Ban
By: Jenelle Crawford, Intern
On June 24th of 2022, the Supreme Court reversed the significant Roe v. Wade case in a 5-4 decision, subsequently ending Americans’ constitutional right to abortion. In the majority opinion following the decision, Justice Samuel Alito said that “the constitution makes no reference to abortion and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including … the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment” (Dobbs v Jackson Women Health organization). Alito cited the original Roe decision as an “abuse of judicial authority” and turned the decision over to the states to set their own laws on abortion. Following the reversal of Roe v. Wade, thirteen “trigger law” states had anti-abortion bans go into effect almost immediately. As abortion bans continue to roll out in more states across the country, serious discussions are happening about the decision’s aftermath and what the socioeconomic effects will be. The fallout of the Roe v Wade reversal will impact young lower income minorities the most. Young people ages 15-24, people with low levels of income and education, and racial minorities are at all at a higher risk for an unintended pregnancy. Not only can an unintended pregnancy financially burden a person, but it also has health risks associated with it, especially for Black and brown people.
Poverty impacts every aspect of a person’s life, from their ability to fulfill basic life necessities, such as having healthy food, shelter, and clothing; to their ability to access means for social mobility, such as a college education. Poverty is a life altering circumstance and now so is abortion access. The effects of the original Roe v Wade decision in 1973 maximized access to social mobility for women. Roe v Wade reduced the number of teen pregnancies and teen marriages by 1/3 and 1/5, respectively. “Women who were able to delay motherhood through legal access to abortions were much more likely to finish college, pursue higher degrees, spend longer time in the labor force, and enter higher paying occupations; they were much less likely to fall into poverty later in life” (qtd in Kolhatkar). Impoverished people will stay impoverished, as they no longer have the means to choose the trajectory of their lives, the means that access to abortion provides.
In the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, the case that helped overturn Roe v Wade, Mississippi argued that the Roe v Wade ruling was irrelevant. Dobbs, Mississippi’s state health officer, cited increased access to things like contraceptives, childcare, and family leave as a means for women to pursue a rich career and family life. Access to childcare, contraceptives, and family leave are inaccessible to people who are young, low-income, and minorities. According to CNBC, childcare in America is $8,000 per child annually, on average (Leonhardt). In homes that sit on or below the poverty line, $8000 per child is not a feasible option. According to a study done in 2010 by the Annie E Casey foundation, impoverished families spend about a third of their income on childcare. According to the CDC, about 38 million Americans live in poverty and a disproportionate number are racial/ethnic minorities.
To make matters worse, the United States does not have federally mandated paid parental leave creating financial barriers to parents staying home with their infants and making childcare a necessary expense. As much as 93% of low wage workers do not have access to paid parental leave (Cahn). As a result, low wage workers are more likely to return to work shortly following birth. A study done by ABT Associates in 2012 found that “25% of parents returned to work within two weeks of their child being born” (qtd in Peck).
Returning to work too quickly after having a baby not only limits the time that a parent and child can bond, but also limits a parent’s ability to set up breastfeeding habits due to short breaks and no time/location to pump breastmilk at work. For this reason, among others, low-income people are more likely to use baby formula to feed their infants. This fact poses a problem now, as the United States enters month five of a baby formula shortage. Supply chain issues started around the beginning of the covid-19 pandemic and ramped up in February 2022 when Abbott Nutrition, the company that produces 40% of all baby formula in America, shut down its factory due to reports of contamination. Even before the effects of the shortage were felt, baby formula was still inaccessible. Not only has the price of the formula gone up 18% since May 2021, according to CBS, but it is much harder to find formula at corner stores than at major supermarkets.
There is a high correlation between living in poverty and being in a food desert. A food desert is an area that lacks access to healthy fresh food due to a high price point or a limited supply of grocery stores in proximity. Living in a food desert can have adverse effects on one’s health, leading to obesity, diabetes, high cholesterol, and heart disease, among others. Food deserts are also a part of environmental racism as they are more likely to affect low-income minorities.
Dobbs makes a point in his argument that every state has safe haven laws that allow parents to give the child to the government without recourse. Dobbs does not; however, take into consideration the toll that simply carrying a pregnancy can have. By reversing Roe v Wade and making people carry to term pregnancies they do not want, creates risk for health problems associated with pregnancy and post-partum. "America has the highest maternal mortality rate of any developed country at 23.8 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2020" (Hoyert). The rate for non-Hispanic Black and Indigenous women is almost 2-3 times that of non-Hispanic white women. Implicit biases in the medical field can be life or death for women of color, as they racial disparity is likely to grow even more substantial now that access to abortion is restricted in states across the country. According to the Washington Examiner, without access to abortions, the maternal death rate in 2020 would have risen 64 deaths or 14% in the 26 states that have and/or planned to ban abortion (Morrison). This potential increase in maternal death was due to the increased exposure to risks associated with pregnancy. Minority women and low-income people are twice as likely to suffer from postpartum mood disorders, and lack of access to resources plays a role. Minority and low-income people are also less likely to be screened for disorders like depression compared to their white counterparts.
Dobbs mentions contraception being so readily available that abortion access is obsolete. However, the education behind obtaining and using contraceptives is severely lacking. In a study conducted by Guttmacher Institute, “more adolescents reported that they had received more instruction about saying no to sex (81% of females and 79% of males) or waiting until marriage (67% and 58%, respectively) than about where to obtain birth control (48% of females and 45% of males) or how to use a condom (55% and 60%, respectively)” (“Receipt of Formal Sex Education”). Why is this? America does not have federally mandated and regulated sex education. Only 39 of the 50 states mandate sexual education in schools. And of those states that offer it, the material taught does not always give students all the information they need to make informed decisions about their health and bodies. According to the Guttmacher institute, "only half of adolescents studied between 2015 and 2019 reported that they received sexual health education that met the standards of the Healthy People 2030 report” (“Receipt of Formal Sex Education”). Many states that take an abstinence only approach to sex education have significantly higher rates of teen pregnancy. While correlation does not prove causation, a compelling case can be made that when adolescents are ill informed about sexual education, they are more likely to have unplanned or unwanted pregnancies.
Dobbs’ also fails to take into consideration the fact that that people seek out abortion for a plethora of reasons. According to the NY times, “the typical abortion patient is in their 20s, already a parent, low income, and single”, among other defining factors (Sanger- Katz et al). The people in these demographics are more likely to have unintended pregnancies, posing a financial and health burden on them. In a study conducted between 2008 and 2010 by the National Library of Medicine, "40% of women surveyed cited financial reasons, 36% cited timing, 31% cited partner related reasons, and 29% cited the need to focus on other children" (Biggs et al.). Additionally, 64% reported having multiple reasons intersecting several categories. As one can see, the decision to have an abortion is complex and multilayered. Potential parents, especially those who are young, minorities and/or low income, are tasked with considering their preparedness for parenthood, their financial standing, and their support system when thinking about bringing a child into the world.
Regardless of the reasoning behind why someone seeks an abortion, it is one’s personal business. The decision to overturn Roe v Wade will not put a stop to abortions in the states that have banned it. People with higher income will still be able to travel to other states and seek medical abortions. For people in poverty, the trajectory of their lives are altered forever due to this decision. There will be an increase in the likelihood of people seeking out unsafe and unregulated treatments to achieve abortion or spending time and money to travel to another state to receive an abortion. More children will be born into environments that do not have enough support to care for them. When the government takes it upon themselves to diminish people’s autonomy to their bodies, it loses sight of its purpose: to be a governing body by the people for the people.
To see the works cited in this article, please click here.