Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Skuster, Patty

Titel

Countering the Antiscience of Abortion Regulation

Ist Teil von

• American journal of public health (1971), 2023-02, Vol.113 (2), p.138-140

Ort / Verlag

United States: American Public Health Association

Erscheinungsjahr

2023

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

Psychology & Behavioral Sciences Collection

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• In an array of health concerns, policymakers have rejected science in favor of lawmaking based on ideology, politics, and religion to the detriment of public health. This is particularly true of stigmatized health areas such as reproductive health and, especially, abortion care.Before the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v.Jackson Women's Health Organization, state lawmakers who were determined to legally restrict abortion enacted laws with the purpose of impeding abortion care. As legislators bound by constitutional protections for the right to abortion, they could not ban abortion outright. Antiabortion lawmakers instead enacted laws that reject scientific evidence to discourage and create obstacles for both abortion providers and patients seeking abortions. Among the many types of antiscientific abortion regulations are medication abortion "reversal" laws. In this issue of AJPH, Redd et al. (p. 202) longitudinally examine these types of laws.Medication abortion "reversal" is an untested and experimental treatment to stop the abortion process for patients who have undergone a medication abortion. Redd et al. note that, since 2015,14 states have enacted laws requiring that patients be told about medication abortion reversal in the counseling process during an abortion, despite the lack of scientific basis for the treatment. Medication abortion reversal laws have primarily been enacted in states with legislatures that are hostile to abortion rights. Indeed, the authors note that legislatures in 11 of the 14 states with such laws have also enacted abortion bans.With the rise of outright bans in abortion-hostile states after the Dobbs decision, medication abortion reversal laws on their own are likely to have less impact. However, attention to these and other antiscientific abortion laws remains critical to research and to ensuring access to abortion care. The Redd et al. findings highlight the urgent need to track and counter antiscience state abortion laws subsequent to the end of federal constitutional abortion rights.