Evaluating Priorities: Measuring Women’s and Children’s Health and Well-being against Abortion Restrictions in the States- Volume II
08.01.17 – Anti-abortion politicians have quietly passed 391 laws restricting access to abortion since 2010. The politicians that push these laws often claim that they are necessary to protect the health and well-being of women, their pregnancies, and their children. Ample scientific evidence makes clear that restricting abortion is detrimental to women and families’ health.
This second volume of ‘Evaluating Priorities’ updates the Center for Reproductive Rights’ collaboration with Ibis Reproductive Health to explore anti-abortion politicians’ claims. The findings mirror those from the 2014 report: the more abortion restrictions a state has, the worse women and children fare when it comes to their health outcomes, and the fewer evidence-based supportive policies a state has.
The Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt pushed back on politicians’ claims that abortion restrictions protect women’s health and safety, favoring scientific evidence and women’s real life experiences over unproven or false claims. This report bolsters that message, illustrating that legislators should be taking their cues from data and their constituents’ needs to address the real health concerns in their states, and should stop playing politics with women’s reproductive rights and health.
Click on this link for Evaluating Priorities – Vol. 2 (PDF, 1.6 MB)
Thompson TA, Seymour J. Evaluating priorities: Measuring women’s and children’s health and wellbeing against abortion restrictions in the states. Research Report. Ibis Reproductive Health; June 2017.