Center for Reproductive Rights
Roe v. Wade was just the beginning for the anti-abortion movement in the United States—their goal is to ban abortion nationwide. Elaine, we can’t let this happen.
Anti-abortion activists have filed a case in a Texas federal court with the goal of ending medication abortion across the country. Currently medication abortion accounts for more than half of the abortions in the United States.
Here’s what you need to know about this new effort to strip essential health care from millions.
Anti-abortion groups are trying to revoke approval of mifepristone.
Several anti-abortion groups—represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom—have filed a case in federal court in Texas seeking to revoke FDA approval of mifepristone, one of the drugs used in medication abortion.
If the court grants the request, medication abortion would be eradicated—even in states where abortion is legal.
If the court grants the anti-abortion groups’ request, access to medication abortion would be eradicated in every state in the country, effectively banning medication abortion nationwide. That means people in every state—even ones where abortion access is protected like New York, California, and Illinois—will not be able to get abortion pills.
This case poses a major threat to people’s ability to access abortion across the country.
Blocking access to mifepristone would force all patients to have procedural abortions and inundate clinics. Many clinics are already overwhelmed by the influx of patients from states that have banned abortion. Medication abortion is incredibly safe and effective.
The court can issue its decision any time after February 10.
The briefing will be complete on February 10, after which point the district court could issue its decision at any time. The judge in the case, Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, is a conservative judge who recently ruled that teenagers can be prohibited from using contraception without parental consent. He has also issued opinions allowing for discrimination against the LGBTQ community and limiting the rights of immigrants.
Inform yourself, share with others, and be ready for the next fight.
The Center for Reproductive Rights is ready to fight, and we’ll need you with us. Forward this email, share on social media, and make sure your friends and family know that this case poses a major threat to people’s ability to access abortion across the country. And without medication abortion access, leading medical associations predict that the country’s maternal mortality crisis will worsen.
In solidarity,
Liz Wagner
Senior Federal Policy Counsel
US Policy and Advocacy, Federal
~~~~~~~
THE TURNAWAY STUDY
Presented by the Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) and Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH).
It is estimated that more than 4,000 women are denied wanted abortions due to facilities gestational limits every year. As more states pass gestational limit laws, thousands more will be affected.
The Turnaway Study was the first study to rigorously examine the effects of receiving versus being denied a wanted abortion on women and their children. Nearly 1,000 women seeking abortion from 30 facilities around the country participated. Researchers conducted interviews over five years and compared the trajectories of the women who received a wanted abortion to those who were turned away because they were past the facility’s gestational age limit. As legislators pass more and more laws to restrict access to abortion care, it’s important to document what happens to women who are unable to obtain an abortion.
RESULTS
Abortion does not harm women. It does not increase women’s risk of having suicidal thoughts, or the chance of developing PTSD, depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, or lower life satisfaction. Abortion does not increase women’s use of alcohol, tobacco or drugs. 95% of women said abortion was the right decision for them. Women who received a wanted abortion were more likely to have a positive outlook on the future and achieve aspirational life plans within one year.
BEING DENIED AN ABORTION REDUCES WOMEN AND CHILDREN’S FINALCIAL SECURITY AND SAFETY.
Women denied an abortion had almost four times greater odds of a household income below the federal poverty level and three times greater odds of being unemployed. There was an increased likelihood that women didn’t have enough money to pay for basic family necessities like food, housing and transportation if they were denied an abortion. Women unable to terminate unwanted pregnancies were more likely to stay in contact with violent partners, putting them and their children at greater risk than if they had received the abortion. Continuing an unwanted pregnancy and giving birth is associated with more serious health problems than abortion.
WHEN WOMEN HAVE CONTROL OVER THE TIMING OF PREGNANCIES, CHILDREN BENEFIT
Existing children of women denied abortions were more than three times more likely to live in households below the federal poverty level and they were less likely to achieve developmental milestones than the existing children of women who received abortions. Nine percent of children born because an abortion was denied met the threshold for poor maternal bonding, compared to three percent of children born subsequently to women who received an abortion.
OUT-OF-POCKET COSTS
Out-of-pocket costs for women whose insurance or Medicaid did not cover abortion were $575. For more than half, out-of-pocket costs were equivalent to more than one-third of their monthly personal income. It cost closer to two-thirds of their monthly personal income for those receiving abortions after 20 weeks.
For more information about the Turnaway Study and detailed references, visit http://bit.ly/TurnawayStudy.
