Most women in dire economic straits after paying for abortions
New data from JAMA shows that women can’t afford to get abortions without insurance covering it
Women who typically get abortions have had catastrophic economic challenges from having to pay out of pocket, according to a new medical study.
In the Journal of the American Medical Association, an article indicated that nearly half of abortion patients faced catastrophic health expenses—costs that hindered basic needs like food and housing. The study defines those expenses as exceeding 40 percent of household income. It’s important to note that this data was collected before the Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade. That has only increased the cost of abortions.
Out-of-state patients experienced double the financial burden of in-state patients due to out-of-pocket costs, travel, and missed work, leading to increased stress, anxiety, and other mental health challenges, with these impacts likely worsening post-Dobbs.
I spoke with M. Antonia Biggs, who was one of the researchers who conducted the study.
“It's the travel, missed work, as well as paying for child care and staying overnight,” Biggs said. “And all of those things can add up to a lot. And if your household income is low, then it's more likely to end up reaching that threshold of being a catastrophic health expense.”
When I asked about how much abortion funds helped, Biggs said that much has changed since the loss of abortion rights as a constitutional guarantee. In her study, some people relied on them.
“I don't think that we can expect abortion funds to be able to cover all of these expenses,” Biggs said. ”I think that the biggest, the most harmful strategy or harmful policy is related to lack of access to insurance for abortion care. In this study, that's pretty much that's what we find.”
People who had access to Medicaid to pay for abortion care were much less likely to suffer catastrophic expenses. While the Hyde Amendment bans federal money to pay for abortions in its Medicaid funding, states can contribute their allocation for reproductive care.
Democratic Party leadership has long resisted attempts to include a plank on its presidential platform to eliminate the Hyde Amendment. Adopting such a position was considered politically unfeasible for many, including former presidents.
Former president Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13535 in March 2010. It reinforced a commitment to the preservation of the Hyde Amendment's policy restricting federal funds for abortion within the context of recent health care legislation. Both antiabortion leaders and abortion rights leaders criticized him for the move. For his part, President Joe Biden opposed the repeal of the Hyde Amendment. Vice President Kamala Harris called for its repeal during her presidential campaign in 2019.
Biggs said that the problems described in the study are now are more common.
“More people are traveling. They're going further to care<” Biggs said. “They're being pushed later in pregnancy, and the later you are in pregnancy, the more expensive the medical costs for the care are going to be. So I would think it is much more likely that these expenses are going to go up.”