Abstract
Abortion rates rose following the expanded legalization of abortion by the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. As a result, the impact of the restriction on Federal funding of abortions under the Hyde Amendment in 1977 was not clear. However, abortion rates had plateaued by 1985, when State funding of Medicaid abortions was restricted in Colorado, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. Analysis of statewide data from the three States indicated that following restrictions on State funding of abortions, the proportion of reported pregnancies resulting in births, rather than in abortions, increased in all three States. In 1985, the first year of State restrictions on the use of public funds for abortion, Colorado, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania recorded 1.9 to 2.4 percent increases in the proportion of reported pregnancies resulting in live births, after years of declining rates. With adjustments for underreporting of abortion, there was an overall 1.2 percent rise in the proportion of pregnancies resulting in live births in those States. Nationally the proportion rose only 0.4 percent. By 1987, the three States had experienced increases above 1984 levels of 1.6 to 5.9 percent in the proportion of reported pregnancies resulting in live births. The experiences of the three States can be used in projecting an expected increase in the proportions of reported pregnancies resulting in live births, rather than in abortions, for similar States. A projection for California, for example, showed that an increase could be expected in the first year of restrictions on the use of public funds for abortion of at least 4,000 births, which could be expected largely to affect women of low income.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Cates W., Jr, Kimball A. M., Gold J., Rubin G. L., Smith J. C., Rochat R. W., Tyler C. W., Jr The health impact of restricting public funds for abortion. October 10, 1977--June 10, 1978. Am J Public Health. 1979 Sep;69(9):945–947. doi: 10.2105/ajph.69.9.945. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cates W., Jr The Hyde Amendment in action. How did the restriction of federal funds for abortion affect low-income women? JAMA. 1981 Sep 4;246(10):1109–1112. doi: 10.1001/jama.246.10.1109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gold R. B. After the Hyde Amendment: public funding for abortion in FY 1978. Fam Plann Perspect. 1980 May-Jun;12(3):131–134. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rubin G. L., Gold J., Cates W., Jr Response of low income women and abortion facilities to restriction of public funds for abortion: a study of a large metropolitan area. Am J Public Health. 1979 Sep;69(9):948–950. doi: 10.2105/ajph.69.9.948. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Torres A., Donovan P., Dittes N., Forrest J. D. Public benefits and costs of government funding for abortion. Fam Plann Perspect. 1986 May-Jun;18(3):111–118. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Trussell J., Menken J., Lindheim B. L., Vaughan B. The impact of restricting Medicaid financing for abortion. Fam Plann Perspect. 1980 May-Jun;12(3):120-3, 127-30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]