"

5 Reproductive Rights and the Government

Joyce Baptist

The ability to decide whether and when to have children remains essential to women’s socioeconomic well-being and overall health. As of 2024, only 56% of women aged 15–49 in unions globally can make informed decisions about their reproductive health, contraceptive use, and sexual relations [1] This autonomy is strongly linked to improved relationship stability and satisfaction. For example, recent research shows that pregnancy scares—when a woman suspects an unintended pregnancy but later finds she is not pregnant—can strengthen serious dating relationships and reduce the likelihood of union dissolution [2]

Access to family planning also plays a critical role in women’s educational and economic outcomes. Women who can delay childbirth are significantly more likely to complete higher education and enter the workforce. Investments in family planning yield substantial economic returns: every $1 invested in contraceptive services in low- and middle-income countries can save up to $3 in pregnancy-related and newborn care costs [3] Moreover, family planning empowers women to pursue higher-level career paths, contributing to national economic growth and individual financial stability. 

Given that earning a postsecondary degree continues to be a key driver of higher lifetime earnings, the ability to make informed family planning choices can mean the difference between living in poverty and achieving long-term financial security.[4]

On June 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in the landmark Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion [5] As of 2025, this ruling continues to have far-reaching consequences, with many states enacting bans or severe restrictions on abortion access. According to the Guttmacher Institute, these restrictions disproportionately harm communities already facing systemic inequities—such as Black, Indigenous, and Latino populations, low-income individuals, immigrants, adolescents, and people with disabilities—by exacerbating barriers to reproductive health care [6]

Abortion Access in 2025: Key Updates

Total Abortions: In 2024, there were approximately 1,038,100 clinician-provided abortions in U.S. states without total bans—an increase of less than 1% from 2023 (Guttmacher Institute, 2025).

Interstate Travel: About 155,000 people crossed state lines for abortion care in 2024, representing 15% of all abortions in states without total bans. States like Kansas (71%), New Mexico (69%), and Illinois (39%) had the highest proportions of out-of-state patients.

Telehealth and Online Clinics: The share of abortions provided via online-only clinics rose to 14% in 2024, up from 10% in 2023. This includes medication abortions provided through shield laws to residents of states with total bans [7]

State-Level Restrictions (as of June 2025):

  • 12 states have total abortion bans (e.g., Texas, Alabama, Mississippi).
  • 6 states enforce bans at 6–12 weeks gestation (e.g., Florida, Georgia).
  • 4 states have limits between 15–22 weeks. 19 states allow abortion up to viability (~24 weeks).
  • 9 states and D.C. have no gestational limits.

Impact on Marginalized Communities: Abortion bans disproportionately affect low-income individuals and people of color, exacerbating economic instability, reducing career opportunities, and increasing long-term financial strain. These groups face compounded barriers due to systemic inequities and restrictive state policies.

  1. Global Health: Science and Practice. (2024). Accelerating progress in women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights decision-making. ↵
  2. Duke University Press. (2025). Make it or break it? Pregnancy scares and romantic relationship dissolution. Demography, 62(1), 291–312. https://read.dukeupress.edu/demography/article/62/1/291/3951769 ↵
  3. Guttmacher Institute. (2023). The case for investment in family planning for women’s empowerment and economic development. https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/2023-09/Investment_Case_for_Family_Planning_Report.pdf ↵
  4. Institute for Women’s Policy Research. (2022). Status of Women in the States. https://iwpr.org/iwpr-issues/status-of-women/. ↵
  5. Davis, K. C. (2024). The Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision: Considerations for future violence research. Psychology of Violence, 14(6), 422–427. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000530. ↵
  6. Fuentes, L. (2023). Inequity in US abortion rights and access: The end of Roe is deepening existing divides. Guttmacher. ↵
  7. Guttmacher Institute. (2023). The case for investment in family planning for women’s empowerment and economic development. https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/2023-09/Investment_Case_for_Family_Planning_Report.pdf. ↵

License

Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Reproductive Rights and the Government Copyright © 2022 by Joyce Baptist is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book