How Abortion Bans Backfire
Texas politicians claim they want fewer abortions, and have proposed abortion bans as a solution to this problem. There’s only one issue: abortion bans don’t actually result in fewer abortions.
If you are concerned about abortion rates, or have a friend or family member who is, it’s helpful to understand the unintended consequences of these bans… and how they may move abortions around, but have no measurable impact on the actual number of abortions taking place.
Here are just a few facts about why abortion bans do not effectively prevent abortions:
Increase in Unsafe Abortions: Restricting legal access to abortion does not eliminate the demand for it. Instead, it often pushes people to seek unsafe, illegal methods. Studies have shown that when safe, legal abortion is unavailable, individuals may resort to dangerous procedures that put their health and lives at risk. Any politician who claims to care about women’s health will be advocating for approaches that do not result in dangerous or even lethal procedures.
Out-of-State Travel for Abortions: Many Texans are forced to travel to nearby states where abortion remains legal, circumventing the restrictions. This means the total number of abortions may not decrease; rather, they are happening elsewhere, often at great personal and financial cost to those seeking them. Those who cannot afford these travel costs may access unsafe abortion methods, as discussed in point one.
Lack of Addressing Root Causes: Abortion bans focus on criminalizing the procedure rather than addressing the root causes of unintended pregnancies. Comprehensive sex education prevents unplanned pregnancies, as does affordable contraception. Without these resources, abortion bans fail to address the underlying circumstances that actually lead to abortions.
Economic Disparities: Wealthier individuals can afford to travel out of state or even out of the country for safe abortions, while low-income people, particularly women of color, are disproportionately impacted by abortion bans. This creates inequitable outcomes, where access to abortion becomes dependent on financial means rather than the legality of the procedure.
Backlog of Foster Care and Child Services: Abortion bans can lead to an increase in unwanted pregnancies being carried to term. Texas already struggles with a foster care system that is overwhelmed. These bans exacerbate the strain on child welfare services without addressing the long-term needs of children born into unstable situations.
Ineffective at Reducing Demand: Research has shown that bans and restrictions do not significantly reduce the rate of abortions. In countries or states where abortion is restricted, abortion rates tend to remain similar to or even higher than areas with legal access. Access to family planning services and contraception has a much more profound impact on reducing abortion rates than bans.
Limited Support During Pregnancy: Unfortunately, Texas does not provide comprehensive support for those forced to carry pregnancies to term. Politicians who are interested in incentivizing pregnancy would be fighting for access to adequate healthcare, childcare, and financial assistance for expectant and new parents. Lack of support increases the hardships that led some to seek abortions in the first place, without reducing the demand for the procedure.
For those who are genuinely interested in reducing unwanted pregnancies and abortions, several effective strategies exist.
Comprehensive sex education: Evidence-based, in-school curriculum that covers contraception, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and reproductive health reduces unintended pregnancies and, by extension, the need for abortions. Studies show that comprehensive programs are much more effective than abstinence-only education in delaying sexual activity and increasing contraceptive use among teens. New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts all have the lowest teen pregnancy rates in the country. These states all offer comprehensive sex education and access to contraception.
Access to contraception: Widespread access to contraception—especially long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) like IUDs and implants—significantly reduces unplanned pregnancies. In Colorado, for example, a statewide program providing free or low-cost LARCs led to a nearly 50% reduction in the teen abortion rate over several years.
Comprehensive Healthcare Access: Affordable healthcare services that include routine reproductive care, pregnancy counseling, and access to birth control reduce the likelihood of unintended pregnancies. Countries with universal healthcare, like the Netherlands, have some of the lowest abortion rates globally due to accessible reproductive health services.
Economic Support for Parents and Families: Programs that offer economic assistance, such as paid family leave, affordable childcare, and healthcare, make it easier for people to continue pregnancies they might otherwise terminate for financial reasons. Research shows that economic insecurity is a major driver of abortion decisions.
Improved Perinatal Healthcare: Ensuring better prenatal and postnatal care can encourage more people to carry pregnancies to term by addressing health concerns and improving outcomes for parents and infants. Reducing maternal mortality and providing robust healthcare reduces the fear of complications, which may lead to abortion decisions.
In short, if elected officials were genuinely interested in reducing abortions, they would invest in evidence-based strategies that address the root causes of unwanted pregnancies and pregnancy terminations, rather than the tactic of banning abortions entirely. This tactic may win them votes and donations from anti-choice lobbying organizations, but it certainly doesn’t reduce the need for abortions in their states.