Literature DB >> 2124355

Trends in rates of live births and abortions following state restrictions on public funding of abortion.

C C Korenbrot1, C Brindis, F Priddy.   

Abstract

Abortion rates rose following the expanded legalization of abortion by the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. As a result, the impact of the restriction on Federal funding of abortions under the Hyde Amendment in 1977 was not clear. However, abortion rates had plateaued by 1985, when State funding of Medicaid abortions was restricted in Colorado, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. Analysis of statewide data from the three States indicated that following restrictions on State funding of abortions, the proportion of reported pregnancies resulting in births, rather than in abortions, increased in all three States. In 1985, the first year of State restrictions on the use of public funds for abortion, Colorado, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania recorded 1.9 to 2.4 percent increases in the proportion of reported pregnancies resulting in live births, after years of declining rates. With adjustments for underreporting of abortion, there was an overall 1.2 percent rise in the proportion of pregnancies resulting in live births in those States. Nationally the proportion rose only 0.4 percent. By 1987, the three States had experienced increases above 1984 levels of 1.6 to 5.9 percent in the proportion of reported pregnancies resulting in live births. The experiences of the three States can be used in projecting an expected increase in the proportions of reported pregnancies resulting in live births, rather than in abortions, for similar States. A projection for California, for example, showed that an increase could be expected in the first year of restrictions on the use of public funds for abortion of at least 4,000 births, which could be expected largely to affect women of low income.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Genetics and Reproduction; Medicaid; Abortion Seekers; Abortion, Induced; Americas; California; Colorado; Demographic Factors; Developed Countries; Economic Factors; Family Planning; Fertility Control, Postconception; Fertility--changes; Financial Activities; Funds; Low Income Population; North America; North Carolina; Northern America; Pennsylvania; Population; Population Dynamics; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcomes; Reproduction; Social Class; Socioeconomic Factors; Socioeconomic Status; United States

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2124355      PMCID: PMC1580169     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Rep        ISSN: 0033-3549            Impact factor:   2.792


  6 in total

1.  After the Hyde Amendment: public funding for abortion in FY 1978.

Authors:  R B Gold
Journal:  Fam Plann Perspect       Date:  1980 May-Jun

2.  The impact of restricting Medicaid financing for abortion.

Authors:  J Trussell; J Menken; B L Lindheim; B Vaughan
Journal:  Fam Plann Perspect       Date:  1980 May-Jun

3.  The Hyde Amendment in action. How did the restriction of federal funds for abortion affect low-income women?

Authors:  W Cates
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1981-09-04       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Response of low income women and abortion facilities to restriction of public funds for abortion: a study of a large metropolitan area.

Authors:  G L Rubin; J Gold; W Cates
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Public benefits and costs of government funding for abortion.

Authors:  A Torres; P Donovan; N Dittes; J D Forrest
Journal:  Fam Plann Perspect       Date:  1986 May-Jun

6.  The health impact of restricting public funds for abortion. October 10, 1977--June 10, 1978.

Authors:  W Cates; A M Kimball; J Gold; G L Rubin; J C Smith; R W Rochat; C W Tyler
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 9.308

  6 in total
  1 in total

1.  Pennsylvania's birth rates after Medicaid abortion restrictions.

Authors:  E M Kahn
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 9.308

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.