If You Can Even Believe, It Sucks to Raise a Family in a State That Bans Abortion

In the immediate aftermath of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, anti-abortion activists rushed to challenge the narrative-slash-universally-known-truth that their politics abandons families and children (once they’re born). They showed up to abortion rights protests waving signs that pledged to adopt forced babies (ew), and, as a PR boost for their universally despised movement, they even put out a few pieces urging anti-abortion politicians to support policies like family leave and child care. Now, more than two years later, we have proof that their “pro-life” movement isn’t just anti-abortion, anti-bodily autonomy, anti-reproductive rights, and anti-choice, they’re anti-family. Please try to contain your shock. 

On Wednesday, Northwestern Medicine researchers published a new study in the American Journal of Public Health which found that states with more abortion restrictions offered substantially less access to paid family leave, health care, food and child care assistance, and other family-supportive policies. “States with the most severe abortion restrictions have the least public infrastructure to support families,” Dr. Nigel Madden, a maternal-fetal medicine physician who led the study, told NBC on Wednesday.

The study used data from December 2023, so, bear in mind that several more states like Iowa and Florida have imposed abortion bans or further restricted abortion since then. Researchers evaluated access to reproductive care in each state, alongside their policies on maternal and family social services. States with the most restrictive abortion bans had the lowest median percentage of Medicaid coverage and also had the highest rates of uninsured women of reproductive age. 

Researchers concluded that Idaho is the least supportive of low-income families. (The state maintains one of the strictest abortion bans in the nation—so strict, in fact, that its narrow exception was the subject of a whole Supreme Court case this summer.) It’s followed by Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, and Missouri, all of which now impose total or six-week abortion bans. In December, Florida banned abortion at 15 weeks while its six-week ban was temporarily stayed in court, which still pushed care out of reach for many.

“In a lot of cases, our most disadvantaged populations are not able to take the time off that they need after giving birth, to recover and to spend time with their baby,” Madden said. “It has both short and long-term ramifications for people and their families.”

At its core, abortion is an economic issue: About half of the number of people who seek abortion are below the federal poverty line, and about 75% don’t have enough money to pay for housing, transportation, and food—all while abortion funds are scrambling to cover these costs for an untenable amount of callers. More than half of abortion seekers already have at least one child. And the Turnaway Study showed that, on top of a range of devastating consequences including a greater risk of long-term domestic violence, seeking and being denied an abortion often pushes people and their children deeper into poverty.

All of the costs surrounding abortion “can set [abortion seekers] back for a long time,” Serra Sippel, interim executive director of the Brigid Alliance to fund abortion-related travel, told Jezebel in May. “The short-sightedness of imposing these bans, the impact it has on the economic infrastructure when so many people are going to lose wages, lose jobs, lose housing—the ripple effect is massive.” 

The study stresses the urgency of the legal landscape for abortion access and families who are increasingly being left without options—these, after all, are not separable issues. “Proponents of abortion restrictions, who identify as ‘pro-life,’ assert that these policies are essential to protect children, women and families. It would seem in these states that the abortion opponent, ‘pro-life’ attitude not only begins at conception but ends there as well,” the study states, adding, “The degree to which these states fail to support their most disadvantaged populations warrants immediate attention and action.”