The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision led to a significant decrease in abortion access in states with new restrictions, resulting in 114,590 fewer procedures, while states without such bans saw a rise of nearly 117,000 abortions. This shift was driven by individuals seeking services in states with more lenient abortion laws. The Society for Family Planning’s data underscores the growing geographical disparities in abortion access, raising concerns about the feasibility of cross-state travel for these services, especially in the face of increasing restrictions and potential legal changes in traditionally more permissive states.
After the Dobbs decision by the Supreme Court, abortion access in states implementing new restrictions saw a staggering decline of 114,590 procedures, while states without such bans witnessed an uptick of nearly 117,000 abortions. This shift was primarily driven by individuals seeking reproductive services in states with more lenient abortion laws. The data from the Society for Family Planning underscores the mounting geographical disparities in access to abortion, prompting concerns about the feasibility of cross-state travel for these services in the face of escalating restrictions and possible legal shifts in historically more permissive states.
Following the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, there was a stark contrast in abortion services between states imposing bans and those without. The number of abortions in states with restrictions plunged by approximately 114,590 in the year after the ruling, while states without such restrictions witnessed an increase of nearly 117,000 abortions.
Impact of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs Decision on Abortion Access and Cross-State Travel
The repercussions of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs vs. Whole Women’s Health are becoming increasingly evident. According to recent figures from the Society for Family Planning, states enforcing abortion restrictions are experiencing a decline in abortion services, whereas states with fewer or no restrictions are seeing an uptick.
As reported in the Society for Family Planning’s #WeCount study, these trends pose significant questions regarding the long-term feasibility of accessing abortion services, particularly for those compelled to travel across state lines.
The 2022 Dobbs ruling, which significantly undercut Roe v. Wade, triggered numerous state laws limiting abortion access. These include six-week bans and almost complete prohibitions, often accompanied by severe legal consequences. The Society for Family Planning’s researchers highlights the complexity and fluidity of these laws, making it challenging for individuals to stay informed of the current legal landscape.
As a result, many seeking abortions in states with stringent laws or uncertain legal statuses are instead traveling to states with more lenient or non-existent abortion restrictions.
Dr. Ushma Upadhyay, the #WeCount co-chair and a professor at the University of California, San Francisco’s ANSIRH, remarked in a press release, “One year post the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, we’re witnessing an alarming shift in abortion access across the U.S. The access varies drastically by state, impacting the healthcare system and individual lives profoundly. Access to vital healthcare services shouldn’t be dictated by geographical location or the ability to travel.”
The study indicates a notable drop in abortion procedures – 114,590 less between July 2022 and June 2023, using baseline data from April and May 2022. This decline breaks down into 94,930 fewer abortions in states with nearly total bans and 19,660 fewer in states with six-week bans.
Texas, Georgia, Tennessee, Louisiana, Alabama, and Wisconsin are among the states with the most significant drops in abortion services.
Conversely, states where abortion remains legal beyond six weeks observed an aggregate rise of 116,790 abortion procedures. The most substantial increases occurred in Illinois, Florida, North Carolina, California, and New Mexico.
These states, often termed “surge states,” have experienced an influx of patients from neighboring states with stricter abortion laws. However, states in the Southeast are more prone to these patient surges due to their proximity to states with tighter restrictions. The trend is less prevalent in states in the Northeast and Northwest or those not adjacent to restrictive states.
The authors of the report also noted that with states like Florida and North Carolina considering more abortion restrictions, the capacity of these surge states to accommodate out-of-state abortion seekers could be at risk.
Moreover, the report addresses the rise of telehealth and virtual-only clinics in providing abortion services, particularly for those in restrictive states. Following the Dobbs decision, there was a 72% increase in abortions conducted through virtual care, constituting 8% of all abortions, up from 5% before the ruling.
The data raises concerns about the sustainability and long-term viability of accessing abortion services in other states. The challenges, including the practical and financial burdens of travel, not only affect the individuals seeking abortions but also strain the healthcare providers in states where abortions remain legal.
Separate studies before the Dobbs decision underscored that increased travel distances could significantly hinder access to necessary abortion services. Financial constraints and the resulting delays or inability to obtain an abortion were commonly reported by patients living far from providers.
Amber Gavin, Vice President of Advocacy and Operations at A Woman’s Choice in Florida and North Carolina, commented on the impact of the Dobbs decision: “The aftermath is as catastrophic as anticipated. Our clinics are struggling to cater to both local patients and a significant influx from states imposing new restrictions. With potential restrictions looming in Florida and North Carolina, there’s a looming question on where individuals in the Southeast seeking abortions might turn.”
