The US debate on abortion is based on political, social, and religious issues – but more often on economic issues.
This week, more than 150 economists have analyzed the impact on women if countries such as Mississippi and Texas are allowed to impose new restrictions on the issue. Their intervention is part of a case that restores the possibility of abortion nationwide nearly 50 years after the Supreme Court of the United States granted legal rights to Roe vs Wade.
Economists complained in short in court from Mississippi, Dobbs vs Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which seeks to crack down on Roe. The Supreme Court is due to hear the oral proceedings in the Mississippi case on December 1, a few months after it refused to stop the “ beating price ” that began. Texas.
In short it is said that the presence of abortions has played a “significant role in women’s pay and education, which is particularly affected by black women”. If Roe is converted, state-by-state birth control restrictions will prevent 120,000 women from reaching out to abortions in the first year, she said.
The signatories include well-known economists, including Claudia Goldin, Lawrence Katz, Francine Blau, Jonathan Gruber and Justin Wolfers.
The authors briefly wrote: “Sufficient evidence suggests that Roe is associated with women’s advancement in social and economic development.” “If Roe is [Planned Parenthood vs Casey] abortions, or severe reductions, can affect the lives of women. ”
Contraceptives “have a real impact on women’s lives,” says C. Nicole Mason, director of the Institute for Women Policy Research. They neglect their education, reduce their salaries, workloads and employment opportunities, and increase their risk of poverty.
There is also a price in the industry. Abortion restrictions have increased the distance women have to travel to the US for medical treatment, which could mean extra work days. It also reduces yields because, as Mason pointed out, when you “think this, you’re not doing your job”.
More than 50 companies, including Patagonia, Lyft, Atlassian and Stitch Fix, signed a letter Tuesday stating that abortion restrictions threaten “the health, freedom and economic stability of our workers and customers… The future of gender equality continues to grow.”
Anti-abortion laws cost the economy and local resources $ 105bn a year to reduce the number of women workers and the income, according to the Center on the Economics of Reproductive Health, a branch of the Institute for Women Policy Research.
“There are good reasons that can be made or opposed to abortion,” Mason said. “What we don’t know much about – or what has been shown by these other interviews – is what affects women and their families economically.
“There is a reluctance to discuss the financial crisis in terms of increased fertility, including abortion,” she added. “But in the meantime, we need to look at all the options that reduce access to women and business and the economy, so that we can know the real and the real.
Economic negotiations are useless, even worse, for abortions critics who see the practice as bad. But in the context of the economic crisis, I am attacking the studies that show that US women have benefited economically and professionally from abortion.
A in a nutshell legal filed in July in a Mississippi case by 240 female professors, mainly in law or medicine, disputed a Turnaway Study in 2018. The study, conducted by a joint research team at the University of California-San Francisco, enrolled nearly 1,000 women from hospitals. 30 in the US between 2008 and 2010.
Some had abortions, while others were expelled on legal grounds. Over the next five years the study found that women in the “turnaway” group, and their children, were at greater risk of poverty.
The authors summarized the study’s findings as “very small”, that the study groups were inadequate, and that “claims that women ‘relied on’ abortions for their advancement immediately violated legal, cultural, professional and other issues affecting women at least 50 years ago”.
A short article that economists wrote this week disputed this, saying the first summary was “choosing a pie.[ed] and criticism[d] early learning and neglect[d] The evidence began to emerge. ”He also said that advances in the field of“ causal inference ”allowed researchers to identify and measure the economic benefits of abortion, not just other factors.
It also ruled that Mississippi’s claims for contraceptives, child abuse and access to parenting information were incorrect.
The women interviewed in the Turnaway Study sought abortions for a variety of reasons, says Diana Greene Foster, who conducted the study and wrote the book: Lack of funding, achievement of certain goals, the fact that they could not provide a better life for the baby. A few years later, when researchers analyzed this, “that’s when the difference lies in the people who were rejected”.
“People understand what they are doing when they make a decision,” he said.
University of Michigan economist Sarah Miller built on the Turnaway Study by reviewing the reports of those who participated in the study. While all women had the same credit history before getting pregnant, they found that women who were denied abortions faced financial hardship.
For women, the amount of debt 30 days before the rise rose to $ 1,700, an increase of 78% from mid-term pregnancy. The number of exemptions, tax evasion and debt repayment increased by 81%.
Miller said he was not surprised by the increase, but was surprised by its size.
Economists have ignored Roe’s actions until the 1990s, says Middlebury College economist Caitlin Knowles Myers. But as soon as the study began, evidence showed that the widespread methods had far-reaching effects.
“There is a lot of controversy and disagreement over abortion on cultural issues,” Myers said. “Economists have no particular idea of when life will begin. . . What we offer to all people is that the opportunity for abortion is very important in people’s lives. ”