Estimation of Multiyear Consequences for Abortion Access in Georgia Under a Law Limiting Abortion to Early Pregnancy

Abstract

ImportanceFollowing the US Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Georgia’s law limiting abortion to early pregnancy, House Bill 481 (HB481), was allowed to go into effect in July 2022.ObjectivesTo estimate anticipated multiyear effects of HB481, which prohibits abortions after detection of embryonic cardiac activity, on abortion incidence in Georgia, and to examine inequities by race, age, and socioeconomic status.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis repeated cross-sectional analysis used abortion surveillance data from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2017, to estimate future effects of HB481 on abortion care in Georgia, with a focus on the 2 most recent years of data (2016 and 2017). Abortion surveillance data were obtained from the 2007-2017 Georgia Department of Public Health’s Induced Termination of Pregnancy files. Linear regression was used to estimate trends in abortions provided at less than 6 weeks’ gestation and at 6 weeks’ gestation or later in Georgia, and χ2 analyses were used to compare group differences by race, age, and educational attainment. Data were analyzed from July 26 to September 22, 2022.ExposuresHB481, Georgia’s law limiting abortion to early pregnancy.Main Outcome and MeasuresWeeks’ gestation at abortion (<6 vs ≥6 weeks).ResultsFrom January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2017, there were 360 972 reported abortions in Georgia, with an annual mean (SD) of 32 816 (1812) abortions. Estimates from 2016 to 2017 suggest that 3854 abortions in Georgia (11.6%) would likely meet eligibility requirements for abortion care under HB481. Fewer abortions obtained by Black patients (1943 [9.6%] vs 1280 [16.2%] for White patients), patients younger than 20 years (261 [9.1%] vs 168 [15.0%] for those 40 years and older), and patients with fewer years of education (392 [9.2%] with less than a high school diploma and 1065 [9.6%] with a high school diploma vs 2395 [13.5%] for those with some college) would likely meet eligibility requirements under HB481.Conclusions and RelevanceThese findings suggest that Georgia’s law limiting abortion to early pregnancy (HB481) would eliminate access to abortion for nearly 90% of patients in Georgia, and disproportionately harm patients who are Black, younger, and in lower socioeconomic status groups.

Intersectional Prevalence of Suicide Ideation, Plan, and Attempt Based on Gender, Sexual Orientation, Race and Ethnicity, and Rurality

“…These manifestations of structural discrimination intersect with one another and are associated with excess risk for health disadvantages for multiply marginalized groups . For example, abortion restrictions disproportionately harm Black women …”

“…9 For example, abortion restrictions disproportionately harm Black women. 19 Typically, STB inequities are investigated by 1 identity at a time. However, people possess multiple identities, each of which comes with varying degrees of advantage or disadvantage due to structural power, privilege, and oppression.…”

Renewed calls for abortion-related research in the post-Roe era

“…In response, leading medical, public health, and community organizations have renewed calls for research to elucidate and address the burgeoning social and medical consequences of new abortion restrictions ( 1–5 ). Abortion research not only includes studies that establish the safety, quality, and efficacy of evidence-based abortion care protocols, but also encompasses studies on the availability of abortion care, the consequences of being denied an abortion, and the legal and social burdens surrounding abortion ( 6 , 7 ). The urgency of these calls for new evidence underscores the importance of ensuring that research in this area is conducted in an ethical and respectful manner, cognizant of the social, political, and structural conditions that shape reproductive health inequities and impact each stage of research—from protocol design to dissemination of findings.…”

U.S. college students’ perspectives on contraception and abortion post-Dobbs: the influence of socioeconomic privilege and gender inequity

“…Due to increased delays in obtaining abortion care, more people are being denied abortion, and surveilled and criminalized for activities during pregnancy (3). Further, abortion restrictions disproportionately impact people who are young, racially marginalized, and economically vulnerable (4)(5)(6)(7). The Dobbs decision has also raised concerns about the right to contraception, which was initially established in Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965 using the same constitutional provision that supported the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 (1).…”