A recent study published in Science Advances has revealed alarming trends in mental health following increased abortion restrictions across various U.S. states post the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health decision. The decision, which devolved abortion regulation to state legislatures, has led to heightened levels of mental distress among residents, especially those with lower socioeconomic status.
Drawing from two years of data collected through the National Household Pulse Survey, researchers analyzed over 60,000 respondents across 21 survey waves. They observed significant rises in self-reported mental health issues such as anxiety, worry, disinterest, and depression, with an approximate 3% relative increase from pre-Dobbs levels ranging from 18% to 26%.
The study underscores the profound societal impact of the Dobbs decision, which has prompted several states to enforce stricter gestational limits and outright bans on abortion. Consequently, many individuals have resorted to traveling across state lines to access abortion services, highlighting the disparities in reproductive healthcare access.
“These sudden changes in abortion accessibility have profound implications for mental health,” noted the study’s authors. They found consistent effects across various demographic factors such as gender, sexual orientation, age, marital status, and race. However, the study also highlighted stark discrepancies based on income and educational attainment.
Specifically, individuals of lower economic means and less education reported more pronounced negative mental health effects compared to their wealthier and more educated counterparts. This disparity underscores the disproportionate impact of abortion restrictions on vulnerable populations.
The study’s lead researcher commented, “As more states contemplate restrictive measures, and with potential federal actions looming, understanding these impacts becomes crucial.” The findings call for a holistic approach to women’s health across diverse population subgroups, especially concerning socioeconomic status.
Despite these findings, the study leaves unanswered questions about the exact mechanisms through which socioeconomic factors influence mental health outcomes in the context of abortion restrictions. The researchers speculated that financial stress associated with unwanted pregnancies or the costs of traveling out of state for abortion services could exacerbate mental health challenges among economically disadvantaged individuals.
The study builds upon prior research, including The Turnaway Study, which highlighted declines in mental health among women denied abortions due to gestational limits. However, this latest research broadens the scope to assess the broader population-level impacts of abortion restrictions on mental health.
“This paper adds to a growing body of evidence illustrating the mental health challenges in the post-Dobbs landscape,” the researchers concluded. They emphasized the need for continued research and policy considerations to address the multifaceted implications of abortion restrictions on mental well-being across diverse demographic groups.
