TEN:
There is an abortion and contraceptive access crisis in the US. On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court revoked the right to abortion in the landmark decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (Dobbs), a ruling that overturned the Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade and sent the issue of abortion legality back to the states. Since the Dobbs ruling a cascade of abortion restrictions have been implemented. As of October 2023, 15 states have banned abortion with limited (and often not observed) exceptions. In 18 states, access is severely restricted due to gestational limits, waiting periods, lack of insurance coverage, or parental notification laws. These restrictions have ripple effects that go far beyond access to abortion care. State legislatures and conservative Judges are advocating for restrictions on contraception, gender-affirming care, and postpartum Medicaid. For health care seekers, providers, and advocates, the confusion, fear, and legal ambiguity following Dobbs has resulted in widespread chilling effects that have permeated the provision of reproductive health care. As we address this current moment in history where access has been suddenly curtailed and the policy landscape remains volatile, it is important to note how legal restrictions on reproductive bodily autonomy—the freedom to decide if, when, and how to have a child and the liberation to shape these circumstances—have historically been used to oppress and control people with the capacity for pregnancy (including women, transgender men, gender expansive, and non-binary people).
-
Burke, K. L., Potter, J. E., and White, K. (2020) Unsatisfied contraceptive preferences due to cost among women in the United States. Contraception: X, 2, 100032.
-
Foster, D. G. (2021) The Turnaway Study: Ten Years, A Thousand Women, and the Consequences Of Having—Or Being Denied—An Abortion. Simon and Schuster.
-
Frost, J. J., Zolna, M. R., Frohwirth, L. F., Douglas-Hall, A., Blades, N., Mueller, J. et al (2019) Publicly supported family planning services in the United States: Likely need, availability and impact, 2016. Guttmacher Institute. Available from: https://www.guttmacher.org/report/publicly-supported-FP-services-US-2016
-
Fuentes, L. (2023) Inequity in US abortion rights and access: the end of roe is deepening existing divides. Guttmacher Institute. Available from: https://www.guttmacher.org/2023/01/inequity-us-abortion-rights-and-access-end-roe-deepening-existing-divides
-
Gunja, M. Z., Gumas, E. D., and Williams, R. D. (2022) The U.S. Maternal Mortality Crisis Continues to Worsen: An International Comparison. The Commonwealth Fund.
-
Johnson, D. M., Madera, M., Gomperts, R., and Aiken, A. R. (2021) The economic context of pursuing online medication abortion in the United States. SSM-Qualitative Research in Health, 1, 100003.
-
Kozhimannil, K. B., Hassan, A., and Hardeman, R. R. (2022) Abortion access as a racial justice issue. New England Journal of Medicine, 387(17): 1537–39.
-
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2018) The Safety and Quality of Abortion Care in the United States. National Academies Press.
-
Roberts, D. (2014) Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty. Vintage.
-
Ross, L. J., Brownlee, S. L., Diallo, D. D., Rodriquez, L., and Roundtable, L. (2001) The ‘SisterSong Collective’: Women of color, reproductive health and human rights. American Journal of Health Studies, 17(2): 79–88.
| May 2022 onwards | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 216 | 216 | 83 |
| Full Text Views | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| PDF Downloads | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Institutional librarians can find more information about free trials here
We are a leading social science publisher
committed to making a difference.
Bristol University Press and
Policy Press
bristoluniversitypress.co.uk