The states with the most restrictive anti-abortion laws do the least to support babies, children, and families, according to a new study. It’s yet another piece of evidence that anti-choicers are pro-life until the exact moment of birth, and not one second longer. It’s far from the first piece of research linking anti-choice policies to legislation that harms babies and families. Numerous studies have documented the role of policies anti-choicers oppose in reducing the abortion rate.
The Anti-Family Policies of Those Who Oppose Abortion
For the study, Ibis Reproductive Health and the Center for Reproductive Rights gathered data on more than 450 abortion restrictions enacted at the state level since 2011.
To identify the states with the most abortion clinic restrictions, they developed a list of targeted restrictions on abortion providers (TRAP), insurance restrictions, abortion age limits, waiting periods, and bans on specific procedures. Then they assigned each state a score out of 18, with higher scores indicating a more restrictive abortion climate.
Next, they developed a list of 25 family-supportive policies, such as healthcare funding, and family leave policies, pregnancy and breastfeeding accommodations. They gave each state a score, with higher scores denoting more support for families.
The higher a state’s anti-abortion score was, the more likely it was to enact few or no family-supportive policies. Vermont has enacted no restrictive abortion laws, and also offers more family support than almost any other state. Oklahoma, Missouri, and Arizona, the states with the most abortion restrictions, also have very few policies designed to support families.
The study makes clear that anti-choice laws aren’t really about protecting babies or encouraging families; they’re designed to punish women for having sex by forcing them to raise babies in poverty, with little social support, and with access to few resources.
Pro-Life Until Birth: Killing in the Name of ‘Life’
The same legislators who care desperately for a zygote or embryo with no feelings or brain activity think that living, breathing babies should have to fend for themselves. The family supportive policies they oppose do more than just make parenthood easier. In some cases, they ensure the survival of mothers and babies. Medicaid expansion saves mothers’ lives and lowers infant mortality. The same politicians who gleefully call themselves pro-life oppose legislation that could actually save lives.
Maternal and infant mortality broadly correlate with fewer family supports. The U.S. maternal mortality rate is already higher than any other nation in the wealthy world, and rising rapidly even as every other country sees their rate fall. In anti-choice states, the picture is even bleaker. Georgia, which recently banned abortion after 6 weeks, has a higher maternal mortality rate than 100 other countries.
Republican lawmakers love to talk about how much they love women and babies. But bring up maternal and infant mortality, and suddenly everything becomes very abstract. They talk about these very real, very cultural, very political phenomena as if they are natural disasters—unpreventable tragedies. The death of women and their babies is an ongoing crisis, spurred by low hospital accountability, a collapsing healthcare system, and almost no support for women and children. They expect women to give birth in a dangerous health system where every pregnancy is potentially life-threatening. Because for them, no penalty is too high for the crime of being female and having sex.
Anti-choicers are killing children and families. The data proves it.