Welfare Generosity, Abortion Access, and Abortion Rates: A Comparison of State Policy Tools

Hussey, Laura S.

doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00692.x

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 72 Moreover, in the absence of programs that promote public health and support parenting such as expanded child care, health care, and higher education, being forced to carry an unwanted or mistimed pregnancy to term may be particularly detrimental to the individual, family, and social wellbeing. 73 , 74 , 75 To the degree that LARC use may prevent unwanted and mistimed pregnancies in the post-Roe landscape, research, policy, and programs to improve patient-centered LARC provision must be examined. Similar social determinants impacting abortion access have been shown to impact LARC use, and future research must examine these intersections.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement and Operationalization of the Social Determinants of Health and Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Use in the U.S.: A Systematic Scoping Review

Downey

Poehling²,

O’Connell³

2022

AJPM Focus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement and Operationalization of the Social Determinants of Health and Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Use in the U.S.: A Systematic Scoping Review

Downey

Poehling²,

O’Connell³

2022

AJPM Focus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…State-of-occurrence abortion data ignore interstate travel by women to nearby states to circumvent a restrictive abortion law in their state. Since New did not control for interstate travel, the use of state-of-occurrence abortion data creates an upward bias in the estimated impact of restrictive abortion laws because abortion rates are underestimated in those states with restrictive abortion laws and overestimated in contiguous states without such laws (e.g., Gius 2007; Hansen 1993; Hussey 2010; Oakley 2003). Restrictive abortion laws may be merely changing the location of the abortion procedure rather than reducing the demand for abortion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, this article calls attention to general methodological lessons that can be drawn from New’s errors that should be of interest to other researchers. In particular, (1) the statistical problems of data measurement errors: the important distinctions between when a law is enacted versus when it is enforced (e.g., Hussey 2010; Kelly and Grant 2007; Meier and McFarlane 1993), (2) the proper correction for heteroskedasticity when using pooled cross-section time-series data: the consequences of using a fixed population weight versus a variable population weight, and (3) the problem with using state of occurrence abortion data rather than state of residence abortion data (e.g., Altman-Palm and Tremblay 1998; Gius 2007; Oakley 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Reexamination of the Effect of Antiabortion Legislation in the Post-Casey Era

Medoff

Dennis

2014

State Politics Policy Q.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Michael J. New, in a recent article in this journal, argues that a major reason for the decline in the incidence of abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court's 1992 Casey decision was the increased number of antiabortion laws—parental involvement laws and informed consent laws—enacted at the state level. However, New's analysis contained critical data, measurement, methodological and estimation errors. This article details all the errors and then reexamines the effect of restrictive state abortion laws on the incidence of abortion over the period 1985–2005. The empirical results find little evidence that the decline in the number of abortions performed since the U.S. Supreme Court's 1992 Casey decision was due to the increase in the number of informed consent and parental involvement laws enacted.

show abstract

“…As a result, governments have developed fertility support policies to compensate for the increased cost of living for families, such that their fertility decision-making is affected. For instance, Hussey, LS (2010) [ 6 ] notes that extensive family leave laws are associated with lower abortion rates. Bae, Gwang, and Kim (2012) [ 7 ] show that government fertility policies have a catalytic effect on increasing fertility.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Family Fertility Support Policies on Fertility, Their Contribution, and Policy Pathways to Fertility Improvement in OECD Countries

Zhang

Cai

Shi

et al. 2023

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cost of childbirth has been confirmed as a vital factor in families’ fertility decision-making, and family welfare policies are capable of compensating for the increase in household living expenses regarding childbirth, such that the country’s fertility situation can be optimized. In this study, the fertility promotion effects of family welfare policies in OECD(Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries are investigated through regression analysis, grey correlation (GRA), and the fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis fsQCA method. As indicated by the results: (1) Family welfare policies notably boost fertility, and the boosting effect is long-lasting. However, this boost will be weakened in countries where fertility rates remain below 1.5. (2) The contribution of welfare policy measures to the fertility-promotion effect varies by country. The contribution of cash benefits is highest in over half of the countries worldwide, the contribution of relevant services and in-kind expenditure is highest in 29% of the countries, and that of tax incentive expenditure is highest in 14% of the countries. (3) The policy mix to boost fertility also varies according to the social context, with three policy groups derived using the fsQCA method. To be specific, the core antecedent conditions comprise cash benefits, relevant services, and in-kind expenditure. On that basis, China should pay attention to the following three points when formulating family welfare policies to tackle their demographic challenges. First, a system of family welfare policies should be developed as early as possible in the context of increasingly severe demographic issues since the incentive effect of family welfare policies will be weakened in countries with chronically low fertility rates. Second, the effects of improvements vary by country, and China should comprehensively consider its national circumstances when formulating and dynamically adjusting the mix of government fertility support policies in accordance with its social development. Third, employment is the main means of securing family income and takes on critical significance to sustaining families. Unemployment exerts a significant disincentive effect, such that it is imperative to reduce youth unemployment and enhance the quality of youth employment. On that basis, the disincentive effect of unemployment on fertility can be reduced.

show abstract

Welfare Generosity, Abortion Access, and Abortion Rates: A Comparison of State Policy Tools

Abstract: This article tests if welfare generosity is related to abortion rates, allowing effects to vary by program type and abortion policy context. Copyright (c) 2010 by the Southwestern Social Science Association.

Cited by 6 publications

References 37 publications

Measurement and Operationalization of the Social Determinants of Health and Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Use in the U.S.: A Systematic Scoping Review

Measurement and Operationalization of the Social Determinants of Health and Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Use in the U.S.: A Systematic Scoping Review

A Critical Reexamination of the Effect of Antiabortion Legislation in the Post-Casey Era

The Effect of Family Fertility Support Policies on Fertility, Their Contribution, and Policy Pathways to Fertility Improvement in OECD Countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About