# data[].attributes.body
https://www.npr.org/2022/08/23/1118846811/two-months-after-the-dobbs-ruling-new-abortion-bans-are-taking-hold

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WASHINGTON, D.C. - This week marks two months since the U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision reversed decades of precedent guaranteeing abortion rights, and the effects of the decision are continuing to unfold as abortion bans take effect around the country.

Well before the opinion was issued on June 24, more than a dozen states had so-called " trigger bans" in place - laws written to prohibit abortion as soon as Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that had legalized the procedure for nearly 50 years, was overturned.

Some took effect almost immediately; at least eight states have implemented total or near-total abortion bans, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Others were at least temporarily delayed by litigation, or by brief waiting periods written into the laws. This week, a new round of bans - in Tennessee, Texas, Idaho, and North Dakota - is set to take effect, barring intervention from the courts.

A cascade of "trigger bans" around the country

To a large degree, the impact of these laws already is a reality - even before they're officially implemented - due to multiple layers of restrictions.

In Texas, where abortion has been prohibited after about six weeks of pregnancy since last September under a law that allowed private citizens to sue abortion providers, the shift was already well under way before the Dobbs decision. The state's trigger ban - which prohibits the procedure almost entirely - takes effect this week. But already, there are no clinics providing abortions in Texas, and some have made plans to move out of state to places like New Mexico.

Idaho, too, has an abortion ban in place that relies on civil enforcement, where individuals can sue people accused of illegally providing abortions after about six weeks. The U.S. Department of Justice has sued in an effort to block another, even more restrictive law - Idaho's trigger ban, which is set to take effect Aug. 25.

North Dakota's only remaining clinic has - at least for now - moved its abortion services to Minnesota, where abortion remains legal. Lawyers for the clinic have asked a judge to block the law from taking effect on Friday.

In Tennessee, which already has very limited abortion access because of a ban on abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy, the law scheduled to take effect this week goes even farther, essentially banning all abortions, with no exceptions for rape or incest. The law also lacks explicit exceptions for medical emergencies, although it includes a provision that would allow doctors to mount a defense against felony abortion charges by arguing they intervened to save a pregnant woman's life or avoid the "serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function."

Battles continue in state, federal courts

Abortion rights groups have been trying to argue that many state constitutions offer protections for abortion rights.

For groups opposed to abortion rights, like Alliance Defending Freedom, efforts are under way to push states to enforce abortion restrictions.

Erin Hawley, the group's senior counsel, said she hopes to see courts in Wyoming, Arizona, and elsewhere allow abortion bans to take effect.

"I think we'll see in a number of other states, that these laws will come online -- that intermediate courts of appeals and the state supreme courts will hopefully find that there is no state constitutional right to abortion," Hawley said.

There are also federal court challenges. A federal judge is expected to take action this week in response to the Department of Justice suit, which challenges Idaho's trigger ban under a federal labor law.

Post-Roe, state lawmakers consider new abortion laws

The Dobbs decision has prompted some Republican state officials to look at passing new laws. In early August, Indiana lawmakers approved a near-total abortion ban, which takes effect in mid-September.

Elisabeth Smith, state policy and advocacy director with the Center for Reproductive Rights, notes that some abortion rights opponents have proposed legislation designed to prevent people from seeking abortions in other states.

"I think it's important to talk about the fact that we will also likely see novel criminal penalties for abortion providers and helpers, and some states trying to prevent people from crossing state lines," Smith said.

That said, abortion rights advocates are encouraged by the results of a ballot initiative in Kansas earlier this month, in which voters strongly rejected a constitutional amendment that would have opened the door to allow state lawmakers to ban abortion. Smith notes that ballot questions related to abortion are slated to go before voters in several states - among them California, Vermont, Kentucky, and Michigan - in November.

Jennifer Driver is senior director of reproductive rights for the State Innovation Exchange, a group that works with lawmakers trying to increase abortion access, even in a post- Roe environment.

As new restrictions continue to take effect, Driver said more patients who have the means will rely on out-of-state travel or use abortion pills at home. She says doctors and other healthcare providers in many states will continue to face dilemmas when helping patients through medical crises.

"The chipping away at abortion rights didn't happen overnight, and the fight to get them back won't as well," Driver said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Two months after the Dobbs ruling, new abortion bans are taking hold

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A cascade of new abortion restrictions known as "trigger bans" are taking effect in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision overturning the right to the medical procedure.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.2plusabortions.com/podcasts-about-abortions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Podcasts About Abortions - 2 + Abortions Worldwide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Share your story. Spread some love. Stop the stigma.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nytimes.com/spotlight/abortion-news

# data[].attributes.headline
info & stats - abortion rights in the US

# data[].attributes.subject
info & stats - abortion rights in the US

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/abortion-laws-roe-v-wade.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tracking Abortion Bans Across the Country

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The New York Times is tracking the status of abortion laws in each state following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E-nCgExajM

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Right to abortion struck down by US Supreme Court - BBC News

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2022/06/24/how-americans-really-feel-about-abortion-the-sometimes-surprising-poll-results-as-supreme-court-reportedly-set-to-overturn-roe-v-wade/?sh=5f095ca72f3a

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Broad support for abortion rights: Gallup polls show Americans' support for abortion in all or most cases at 80% in May 2021, only sightly higher than in 1975 (76%), and the Pew Research Center finds 59% of adults believe abortion should be legal, compared to 60% in 1995-though there has been fluctuation, with support dropping to a low of 47% in 2009.

The share of Americans in Gallup's poll who say abortion is morally acceptable reached a record high of 47% in May, up from a low of 36% in 2009, and a Quinnipiac poll found support for abortion being legal in all or most cases reached a near-record high in September with 63% support.

Steady support for Roe: Support for the Supreme Court's abortion precedent in Roe v. Wade is similar, with a November Quinnipiac poll finding that 63% agree with the court's ruling; and 72% of respondents in a January Marquette Law School poll and 69% of January CNN poll respondents oppose it being overturned.

If Roe is overturned: A January CNN poll found a 59% majority want their state to have laws that are "more permissive than restrictive" on abortion if Roe goes away, while only 20% want their state to ban abortion entirely (another 20% want it to be restricted but not banned).

Strongest support for abortion-within limits: An Associated Press/NORC poll in June found 87% support abortion when the woman's life is in danger, 84% support exceptions in the case of rape or incest, and 74% support abortion if the child would be born with a life-threatening illness.

When abortion support drops: The further into the pregnancy, with AP/NORC finding 61% believe abortion should be legal during the first trimester, but only 34% in the second trimester and 19% in the third, and an April Wall Street Journal poll finding more Americans approve of 15-week abortion bans than disapprove.

Partisan split-but not in all cases: Democrats are statistically far more likely to support abortion rights than Republicans, with Quinnipiac finding in September that only 39% of Republicans believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases versus 89% of Democrats-though 70% and 76% of Republicans support exceptions for rape and incest and when the mother's life is at risk, respectively.

The religious support abortion rights-except for White evangelicals: Pew found Americans with religious affiliations are far more likely to oppose abortion than the nonreligious (82% of whom believe abortion should be legal), but with the exception of white evangelical Protestants (77% of whom believe abortion should be illegal), a higher share of every religious group polled-white non-evangelicals, Black Protestants and Catholics-favor abortion rights.

Gender split-not as big as you might think: Women are slightly more likely to support abortion than men, with Pew finding 62% of women want abortion to be legal versus 56% of men.

Asian Americans most supportive: Pew's polling found majorities of every race support abortion being legal, though support was higher among Black (67% believe should be legal) and Asian (68%) respondents than those who are white and Hispanic (57% and 58%, respectively).

Support drops with age: The Pew poll found support for abortion highest among those ages 18-29 (67% believe should be legal), compared with 61% of those 30-49, 53% of those ages 50-64 and 55% of those ages 65 and up.

Support increases with more education: Pew found 68% of college grads want it legalized versus 61% of those with some college and 50% with a high school education or less (a Washington Post/ABC poll found a similar correlation).

Parents less likely to support abortion rights: All In Together's poll, conducted in September with Lake Research and Emerson College Polling, found 36% of those with children in their house opposed the Texas near-total abortion ban versus 54.9% without kids, and the Post/ABC poll similarly found 58% of parents want the Supreme Court to uphold Roe v. Wade versus 62% of non-parents.

Cities support more: Those in the Northeast are the most supportive of abortion rights, with the Post/ABC finding 71% there want Roe v. Wade to be upheld versus 58% in the Midwest, 53% in the South and 66% in the West, and urban residents are more likely to support Roe v. Wade (with 69% support) than those in suburban or rural areas (56% and 57%, respectively).

Support rises with income level: The Post/ABC poll found 59% of those earning less than $50,000 per year wanting the court to uphold the law versus 62% of those making between $50,000-$100,000 and 65% of those earning more than $100,000.

Abortion Polling (Gallup)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Americans Really Feel About Abortion: The Sometimes Surprising Poll Results As Supreme Court Overturns Roe V. Wade

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Broad support for abortion rights: Gallup polls show Americans' support for abortion in all or most cases at 80% in May 2021, only sightly higher than in 1975 (76%), and the Pew Research Center finds 59% of adults believe abortion should be legal, compared to 60% in 1995-though there has been fluctuation, with support dropping to a low of 47% in 2009.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.mariestopes.org.au/donate/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Globally there are over 200 million women with an unmet need for modern contraception. MSI Reproductive Choices strives to address this need, transforming the lives of women and girls by providing them with the reproductive choices they want, where they are needed most.

Over the last 40 years, MSI Reproductive Choices has provided life-changing sexual and reproductive healthcare to over 100 million people worldwide. In 2016, we delivered family planning, contraception, safe abortion and sexual health services to over 20 million women and men across 37 countries.

In Australia, we fundraise for our Asia-Pacific programs through our international development organisation, MSI Asia Pacific.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Donate to Marie Stopes Charity | MSI Australia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Globally there are over 200 million women with an unmet need for modern contraception. MSI Reproductive Choices strives to address this need, transforming the lives of women and girls by providing them with the reproductive choices they want, where they are needed most.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ibtimes.sg/throwback-biden-was-strong-anti-abortionist-vehemently-opposed-roe-v-wade-1970s-64446

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
International Business Times, Singapore Edition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
US President Joe Biden has been against abortion for a long time and he had voted against the Supreme Court's verdict on the Roe V. Wade case, which legalized abortion across the US. Biden, in 1982, voted to allow individual states to overturn Roe v. Wade ruling.

Biden, a senator at that time, backed a constitutional amendment to the ruling. Biden had cited his Roman Catholic faith as the reason for his stance on the Roe v. Wade ruling.

But the bill never made it to the full Senate, and when it came back up the following year, Biden voted against it and has since supported abortion rights, according to The New York Times.

At that time, Biden had pointed out that the Supreme Court had gone too far in the Roe case as the court had legalized abortion.
Biden's Controversial Remark on Abortion
Even during an interview at that time, he stressed that a woman shouldn't have the sole right to say what should happen to her body.

But when he was leaving the vice president's office in 2017 there were some changes in his abortion view as he turned more moderate on abortion than his conservative stance. Experts believe that the change in his stance aimed to target women voters for the 2020 polls.

Abortions Could Be a Big Issue For the Next Elections
Now he has changed his stance on abortion. This time as elections are nearing he could make efforts to lure women voters. Democrats see the issue could be a major one as primaries are nearing and women are going to be the majority of the voters in several areas.

The leak from the Supreme Court has re-ignited the abortion row in the US as the apex court could overrun the Roe V. Wade verdict, which legalized abortion across the US. States could have the freedom to ban abortion following the court's decision. It's believed that nearly half of the US states could ban abortions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Throwback: Biden Was Strong Anti-Abortionist; Vehemently Opposed Roe V. Wade in The 1970s

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
US President Joe Biden has been against abortion for a long time and he had voted against the Supreme Court's verdict on the Roe V. Wade case, which legalized abortion across the US. Biden, in 1982, voted to allow individual states to overturn Roe v. Wade ruling.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/06/13/about-six-in-ten-americans-say-abortion-should-be-legal-in-all-or-most-cases-2/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abortion has long been a contentious issue in the United States, and it is one that sharply divides Americans along partisan, ideological and religious lines.

Today, a 61% majority of U.S. adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 37% think abortion should be illegal in all or most cases. These views are relatively unchanged in the past few years. The latest Pew Research Center survey, conducted March 7 to 13, finds deep disagreement between - and within - the parties over abortion. In fact, the partisan divide on abortion is far wider than it was two decades ago.
Related: Explore an interactive look at Americans' attitudes on abortion.
In the latest survey, Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are 42 percentage points more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to say abortion should be legal in all or most cases (80% vs. 38%). This gap is little changed over the last few years, but the current divide is wider than it was in the past. For instance, as recently as 2016, there was a 33-point gap between the shares of Democrats (72%) and Republicans (39%) who supported legal abortion in all or most cases.

Pew Research Center conducted this study to better understand Americans' views on abortion. For this analysis, we surveyed 10,441 U.S. adults in March 2022. Everyone who took part in this survey is a member of the Center's American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP's methodology.

Here are the questions used for this report, along with responses, and its methodology.

This wider gap is mostly attributable to a steady increase in support for legal abortion among Democrats. In 2007, roughly two-thirds of Democrats and Democratic leaners (63%) said abortion should be legal in all or most cases. Support among Democrats has risen by nearly 20 points since then, and 80% now say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

Views among Republicans have remained relatively steady during this period. In 2007, around four-in-ten Republicans (39%) said abortion should be legal in all or most cases; today, 38% say this.

There are ideological differences within both parties over abortion, though the divide is starker within the GOP. Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, 60% of moderates and liberals say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, compared with just 27% of conservative Republicans.

While liberal Democrats are 18 percentage points more likely than conservative and moderate Democrats to say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, wide majorities of both groups (90% and 72%, respectively) say this.

Support for legal abortion varies by race and ethnicity, education and religious affiliation.

Majorities of adults across racial and ethnic groups say abortion should be legal in all or most cases. White adults and Hispanic adults, however, are slightly less likely to say this than Black and Asian adults. Roughly six-in-ten White (59%) and Hispanic adults (60%) say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, compared with larger majorities of Black (68%) and Asian (74%) adults.

Support for legal abortion is greater among those with higher levels of education. While majorities of those with a postgraduate degree (69%), bachelor's degree (64%) and those with some college experience (63%) say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, adults with no more than a high school education are more divided on the issue: 54% say abortion should be legal in at least most cases, while 44% say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases.
Note: This is an update of a post originally published July 17, 2017. Here are the questions used for this report, along with responses, and its methodology.
White evangelical Protestants continue to be opposed to abortion in all or most cases. Nearly three-quarters of White evangelicals (74%) say it should be illegal in all or most cases, while 24% say it should be legal in at least most cases. In contrast, a majority of White Protestants who are not evangelical (60%) say abortion should be legal in all or most cases. Religious "nones" - those who are religiously unaffiliated - overwhelmingly support legal abortion. Over eight-in-ten (84%) say it should be legal in all or most cases, while just 15% say it should be illegal.

Among the public overall, there is a modest gender divide in views of whether abortion should be legal: 58% of men and 63% of women say it should be legal in at least most cases. Within both parties, the views of men and women are largely aligned. Among Democrats, 80% of both men and women say abortion should be legal in all or most cases. Similarly, 36% of Republican men and 39% of Republican women say the same.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
About six-in-ten Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A majority of U.S. adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases; 37% think abortion should be illegal in all or most cases.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.washingtoninformer.com/howell-empowering-black-communities-means-ensuring-we-can-make-our-own-decisions-with-dignity/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It is no secret that our institutions and health care systems have long failed Black people. We see this in the sky-high rates of Black maternal death, infant mortality, and poor health outcomes across the board. And now, we await one of the most consequential Supreme Court rulings that could push one of our health care options entirely out of reach for Black communities across the country. Access to abortion is deeply connected to the health and economic security for individuals and families. Now is the time for bold action so that the Supreme Court does not deny another of our rights.

Since 1973, Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land, and while abortion remains legal in all 50 states, it has never been widely accessible for Black communities, especially those of us working to make ends meet. In 2021 alone, 108 abortion restrictions were enacted, with the impact falling hardest on Black and Brown people. For decades anti-abortion lobbyists and politicians have actively worked against us by denying us the agency to determine and control our futures. The ugly truth is that abortion bans are rooted in white supremacy and anti-Black racism, and are, by design, crafted to harm Black people. Bans are not about protecting our mothers, children, and communities, but further controlling, marginalizing, and disempowering us. Throughout much of its history, the mainstream feminist movement ignored the needs of Black communities. In 1994, Black activists responded to this by creating a visionary framework - reproductive justice - which is defined as "the human right to control our sexuality, our gender, our work and our reproduction - the right to have children, not have children, and parent the children we have in safe and healthy communities."

While activists of color have historically practiced reproductive justice through our grassroots organizing, campaigns, and broader social justice work, naming it has helped further focus on the needs of our communities as mainstream leaders have failed to recognize the unique challenges that Black women in particular face when trying to obtain abortion care. Whether it's traveling long distances because abortion is not accessible in our communities, the inability to pay for abortion care, or facing racism from health care providers who are not invested in supporting our health and well-being, the consequences are steep. Abortion justice is only one part of our liberation, and we must view it within the wider context of racial, economic, and environmental justice.

The same challenges that prevent people from accessing other vital services also arise when people need an abortion. Abortion funds across the country have been a lifeline for countless communities as they help eliminate the geographic, financial, and other barriers to accessing care, but this should not be our reality when abortion is legal in all 50 states. As other states move to pass copycat bills modeled after Texas' 6-week abortion ban, we need to urgently change course.

Abortion is rooted in freedom. When abortion is available and affordable, we are more able to make our own decisions about whether and when to start or expand our families. This gives us the opportunity to make important decisions about our health, to care for our families, to pursue our dreams, and to live in thriving communities. When abortion is accessible, we see its positive impact for generations, but when it is pushed out of reach, it causes irreparable harm to the emotional, financial, and physical health of those who are forced to carry a pregnancy against their will.

Even If the Supreme Court upholds Roe later this year, it will still not be enough. From the grassroots activism on the ground to the politicians making decisions about what we can and cannot do with our bodies, this is why we need to support efforts to ensure all people have real access to abortion. Abortion care that is covered by insurance, that is nearby, and without unnecessary waits, or asking neighbors to spy on us, or any other efforts to interfere with our decisions. In short, access to abortion care, just as other health care, should not depend on where we live or who sits in power in our state capitals.

Black women have always been visionary leaders at the helm of all forms of social justice in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. We have fought for a better, brighter future because we know it is our birthright. This is why we continue to demand that our elected officials do more for us - to make abortion accessible and affordable to all who need it. Abortion access is about much more than our legal rights; it is about our humanity, dignity, and freedom - and we deserve to be free.

Marcela Howell is president and CEO of In Our Own Voice: National Black Women's Reproductive Justice Agenda. Follow her work on social media at @BlackWomensRJ.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
HOWELL: Empowering Black Communities Means Ensuring We Can Make Our Own Decisions with Dignity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is no secret that our institutions and health care systems have long failed Black people. We see this in the sky-high rates of Black maternal death, infant mortality, and poor health outcomes across the board.

# data[].attributes.body
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/522112-val-demings-were-going-to-talk-about-abortion-rights-and-whats-next/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Florida Politics - Campaigns & Elections. Lobbying & Government.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Val Demings: ‘We’re going to talk about’ abortion rights and ‘what’s next’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Demings charged Rubio thinks it is OK ‘to treat women like property, again.’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kim Mills: In May, a leaked draft of a Supreme Court decision indicated that the court might soon overturn 50 years of legal precedent and strike down Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 ruling that found there is a constitutional right to abortion. Dozens of states are poised to outlaw or dramatically restrict abortion if Roe is overturned. While the court has yet to issue a final ruling, we're going to talk today about one aspect of what a post-Roe future would look like. What could happen to the mental health and wellbeing of people who are no longer able to access abortion?

Abortion opponents have long argued that the procedure harms women's mental health and that it leads to depression, anxiety, regret, and even post-traumatic stress disorder. But years of research have failed to find that abortion itself causes these outcomes. So how does obtaining an abortion, or being denied one, affect mental health and wellbeing? What are the effects of laws that limit access to abortion such as those that mandate waiting periods or pre-abortion counseling? And how might new laws that outlaw abortion affect people even in parts of the country where abortion remains legal?

Welcome to Speaking of Psychology, the flagship podcast of the American Psychological Association that examines the links between psychological science and everyday life. I'm Kim Mills.

Our guest today is Dr. Antonia Biggs, a social psychologist and associate professor at the Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health program at the University of California, San Francisco. Dr. Biggs studies the mental health effects of abortion. She led the mental health analysis for the Turnaway Study, a nationwide examination of the health and wellbeing of women who seek abortions. She also researches the challenges people face when accessing sexual and reproductive health services, as well as public attitudes toward abortion, particularly medication induced abortion.

Thank you for joining me, Dr. Biggs.

Antonia Biggs: Hi, thank you so much for having me. So excited to be here.

Mills: As I mentioned a moment ago, abortion opponents often argue that abortion is in itself bad for people's mental health and can lead to many negative mental health outcomes. The Turnaway Study, on which you worked, addressed this question directly. Would you start by telling us about that study, how it was conducted and what it found?

Biggs: Sure. So the Turnaway Study is a national study that was led by my colleague, Dr. Diana Greene Foster, at UCSF. And in this study, the impetus behind this study really came from this idea that abortion harms women's mental health. This is something that Justice Kennedy had stated in the Gonzales v. Carhart case, where he literally said that, "We don't have reliable data to measure the phenomena but that it seems unexceptionable to conclude that some women are going to come to regret their abortion and that severe depression and low self-esteem is going to follow." So this is an assumption that has been integrated in a lot of the state-level restrictions on abortion, yet he clearly states that we don't have reliable data. So the Turnaway Study really aimed to provide that reliable data. So it's one of the most rigorous studies that we have, studying that question.

So we recruited nearly a thousand women and followed them for five years. And we compared people who had an abortion to people who were denied an abortion because they were just above a facility's gestational age limit. And we recruited people across the U.S. and we were really able to assess whether the people who had an abortion were at increased risk of having negative mental health outcomes when compared to the people who were denied an abortion. And what we found is that this assumption is wrong, we found that people who had an abortion were at no, they were not at an increased risk of experiencing depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, post-traumatic stress disorder. So we looked at all of those outcomes and we did not find an increased risk among the women who had an abortion. But what we did find is that the women who were denied an abortion did have short-term elevated levels of stress, anxiety, low life satisfaction, and low self-esteem when compared to the women who were able to get their wanted abortion.

So in fact, we found the opposite of what people were assuming. And then the other thing we found is that women, most women do not regret their abortion. Actually, we found that nearly 99% of women when we followed them for over five years, say that the abortion was the right decision for them.

Mills: Okay. So you're a psychologist and you focused on the mental health outcomes in the analyses of the Turnaway data. But the study also looked at other outcomes like physical health and the economic effects of getting or being denied an abortion. What were some of the highlights of those findings?

Biggs: Yeah. So what we found when we look at all the other outcomes that we looked at, we found that the people who were denied an abortion were much more likely to experience economic hardship and economic insecurity that lasted for years. This impacted the financial wellbeing of the people who were denied an abortion, as well as their children and families. So they were much more likely to live in poverty. We also found that people who were experiencing intimate partner violence were significantly more likely to be tethered to those partners over years. The people who were denied an abortion were more likely to stay in contact with those violent partners than the people who were able to get their abortions.

And then from a physical health perspective, we also, we know that abortion is much safer than childbirth. And in the Turnaway Study, we found that people who were denied an abortion and carried those pregnancies to term were much more likely to experience hypertension, chronic pain. They had a greater likelihood of poor health compared to those who had received an abortion. And then most tragically, we actually had two people who died in childbirth, of the women who were denied an abortion. And that was that's really an astronomical number when you think of the number of people that we included in this study, and nobody who had an abortion died. So we found very severe consequences to their physical health.

Mills: What are the biggest challenges of doing this type of research? Was it hard to collect the sample? Was it difficult to structure the questions in a way that would get you what you needed? Tell us about that.

Biggs: Well, I think that one of the reasons why we haven't had good data up until the Turnaway Study is because of the challenges conducting this kind of research. So you can't randomize people to an abortion group or a not abortion group ethically, for obvious reasons. And so that has led to a lot of correlational studies that don't take into account some important factors that could predispose people to negative mental health outcomes. So what was unique about this study is that my colleague, Dr. Diana Greene Foster was brave enough to do the study that nobody thought she could do, which is to interview people who were denied an abortion at the time of being denied an abortion. So, people didn't think that she could do it, but she did with the help of amazing clinics who helped with the recruitment.

The idea was spawned by a colleague of mine who's a clinician, Dr. Eleanor Drey, who knew that women were being turned away and was wanting to know what happens to those people. So that prompted the study design and it was a tremendous amount of work, involved all the clinics who helped to recruit. And then we followed people for five years, interviewing them every six months, so 11 waves of interviews. So it was a huge, tremendous amount of work and involved a multidisciplinary team of experts, clinicians, demographers, epidemiologists, which is one of the strengths of the study, but also a challenging study to conduct.

Mills: What were the limitations? I mean, if you could have done an ideal study with no limitations, what would it have looked like compared to what you had to do?

Biggs: So every study has its limitations. I think in terms of this particular study design, I think it's one of the best. It sort of takes advantage of a quasi-experimental design. One of the limitations is that more people didn't participate. So our participation, ideally, you want everyone to participate, but of course that's never going to be possible. So I'm not sure what we would've done differently other than in terms of getting more people to participate. I think in retrospect, there's probably like tweaks that we would've done to our survey instrument, but overall, I think it's a study that we're all very proud of.

Mills: There's another idea that's often cited by abortion opponents, that many women come to regret having had an abortion. What does the research say about abortion and regret?

Biggs: So the research says that-well the Turnaway Study research says that most people do not regret their abortions. 99% of women say that the abortion was the right decision for them and this continues over five years. We also have research from other studies that have looked at women. So my colleague, Dr. Katrina Kimport has done interviews with people who said that they had emotional, really specifically trying to find people who may have regretted their abortions and it was very hard to find those people. But when she did, she conducted, I think, 17 interviews. And what she found was that it wasn't that people were regretting the abortion itself, it was that people were regretting the circumstances around the abortion.

So there's something that we call decisional regret versus situational regret, which is a term that a colleague of mine, Katie Watson wrote a paper about. And the idea is in the case of abortion, is that you wish you weren't in that circumstance that led you to need an abortion. You wish that maybe your partner reacted differently and was more supportive, or you wish that you had better financial circumstances, or you were more stable housing. There's situations in your life that you wish were different so that you could have that, carry that pregnancy to term. And so there's regret about that. And really, it's very rare that people are regretting that they actually had the abortion, once they have no other option.

Mills: Now, you've also done research into the reasons why women seek abortions. What are some of the most common reasons and do they differ from what most people think?

Biggs: Well, women have abortions for many reasons. Often there's more than one reason for them choosing to have an abortion. But I don't know that they differ from why people think. I think people, the most common reason is financial reasons, economic reasons, not being in the right, having the right financial circumstances to raise a child. Many women are concerned about their existing children and they want to provide a better life than they think they can provide for that child at the time. Some choose to have an abortion due to partner related reasons. They're not with the right partner. And yeah, lots of different reasons.

Mills: Have those reasons changed over time?

Biggs: They tend to be the same reasons that people-any reason why it might not be a good time to carry pregnancy to term tends to be the reason why people have an abortion and that hasn't really changed over time.

Mills: What has the availability of medication induced abortion done to change the landscape out there? Are we seeing more women accessing that type of treatment as opposed to surgical abortion?

Biggs: Yeah. We've seen tremendous growth in the provision of medication abortion. Now it's over half of people, half of abortions are abortions and it used to be much lower. I think that in part, that has to do with now we have telemedicine provision of medication abortions. So particularly during the pandemic, telemedicine became available in the case of medication abortion. So more people are able to access it. People prefer, in some cases, people prefer medication abortion because it feels more natural or more private. They would prefer to pass the pregnancy, be at home at the time. So, but then there's of course, people who prefer and in-clinic procedure as well.

Mills: How much do we know about the children who are born to women who had wanted to have an abortion but were unable to obtain one? Now what happens to them and are most of them adopted? Do mothers tend to keep them? Or is this just an area that needs more study?

Biggs: Well, in the Turnaway Study, we looked at the people who were denied an abortion and carried those pregnancies to term and we looked at the outcomes of those children. So they were significantly more likely to live in poverty as I had mentioned before, very few place those children up for adoption. That was a very uncommon scenario. So this idea that has been purported, that adoption is going to take the place of access to abortion is not evidence based. We know that is very unlikely to happen. We also saw very sadly and tragically, that the people who were denied an abortion carried those pregnancies to term were less likely to bond with that child. So we looked at indicators of maternal bonding and that was lower. And we also saw that the existing children were less likely to reach those developmental, classic developmental milestones that are measured and they weren't quite reaching the same milestones. So the impacts for the children are very real.

Mills: So you talked about existing children, meaning that a lot of these women already had children and that the children that they had were also affected by the outcome, the fact that the woman couldn't get an abortion.

Biggs: That's right. Yeah. So the entire families are affected, including the ones who were already in the household. And that is one of the very, one of the important reasons why people want an abortion too, is that they're thinking about their other children and families.

Mills: Many states already have laws mandating that people undergo a waiting period or counseling before they can have an abortion. How do those kinds of requirements affect women's access to abortion? And then how do they affect the women's mental health afterward?

Biggs: Yeah. Well, it's really interesting that these mandated waiting period and mandated counseling laws are passed with this idea that they're going to protect women from harm, protect them from physical harm and mental health harm. In Texas, one of the-women are required to receive a booklet that warns them of an increased risk of becoming suicidal. And the idea that they're going to protect people's mental health is definitely not based in evidence. And we see that as I just shared, it's very much quite the opposite. But what's really hard to stomach with these laws is that they're not thinking about what kind of mental health risk are they, so they're saying they're protecting people from mental health harm, but they may also be increasing mental health harm.

And we did some work where we looked at the people who had to overcome burdens accessing care and what those associations were with mental health symptoms and we found that people who had to overcome barriers accessing care. So traveling far, who had trouble finding a clinic and other obstacles, they were more likely to experience symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression than people who didn't have to overcome those obstacles. And the other thing that we found is that lack of autonomy so being forced to wait, which is what is required in a mandated waiting period law, being forced to wait after you've made a decision is also associated with more stress, anxiety, and depression. So these laws are harmful to people's mental health and do the opposite of what they claim to do.

Mills: Now you've studied the role that stigma plays in how women experience abortion and how they feel about it afterward. Can you talk about that?

Biggs: Yeah. So we in the Turnaway Study, we looked at people, we asked people whether they felt that their community or people close to them would look down on them if they knew they had an abortion and the vast majority said that they did. So perceived abortion stigma is pervasive. And then when we looked to see those who experienced perceived abortion stigma and their mental health outcomes years later, we found that those who perceived more stigma were significantly more likely to experience psychological distress in the five years after having sought or been denied an abortion.

Mills: And I would think that would be part of the reason that it's so hard to get the sample. I mean, just the stigma associated with getting the abortion is, it was hard enough going to get the abortion. And now a researcher wants to talk to you about how you feel? That's got to be tough.

Biggs: Yeah. I think that, I mean, we've found that many people actually enjoyed sharing their stories cause this might be, the interviewer may the only person that they could share their stories with due to stigma. So for some people, I think that it was a good reprieve to be able to be with people who aren't going to judge you about your abortion and actually be interested in your experience. And then in other cases, we would ask them so many questions about the abortion. And we heard from the interviewers that they said, they never thought about their abortion until we picked up the phone and called them because it's something that they sort of had moved on and weren't really thinking about it.

Mills: If Roe is overturned, what kinds of effects do you anticipate we're going to see on women who live in parts of the country where abortion remains legal and what about where it's illegal? I mean, we've already got a mental health crisis in this country. What do you believe and maybe this is unfair because you haven't done the research yet, but I mean, what would you anticipate as a researcher, would be the outcome?

Biggs: Well, we expect, if Roe is overturned, we expect that half the country is going to lose access to abortion which means that more women are going to need to travel out of state to get an abortion, or that more women are going to choose to self-manage their abortion, so have an abortion on their own without clinical assistance. This may be something that is likely much safer than in pre-Roe years in that many people will have access to medication abortion, but some may not. I mean, some may choose to use physical methods. And then the other outcome is that more people are going to carry to term, which we already know is riskier physically and can lead to a host of negative outcomes, as we found in the Turnaway Study.

I worry about lack of bodily autonomy that this decision means for people. It means that they are being denied a right to exercise their own bodily autonomy, and being forced to travel or forced to carry it to term or forced to end the pregnancy on their own when they may prefer to have clinical assistance. So I think this is going to push people later in pregnancy, it's going to force more travel, and it's going to negatively impact in particular, people who have fewer resources, whether that's financial resources or emotional resources. And I also worry about people being criminalized, people who self manage their abortions are at risk of being criminalized. And then we know that certain groups of people are more likely to be targeted by the criminal justice system. And so there are a lot of things that I worry about. I also think that maybe this is going to increase abortion stigma. So I think if abortion is illegal, does that mean that more people are going to think that being against abortion is, I don't know. Our attitudes about abortion, could those change and will people be judged more for seeking abortion? I don't know. Those are things I don't know.

Mills: So what are the biggest questions you think researchers still need to answer about abortion and mental health?

Biggs: So we know that for most people, the population level, abortion, it doesn't increase people's risk for mental health harm but there's some people who may need support. But what we know very little about is what is the impact of all of the structural stigma and these laws and these increased barriers and all the obstacles that people need to overcome. I feel like we need more work to understand how that might negatively impact people. There's some qualitative work that shows that overcoming these barriers can be very traumatic and I think that's something that I would want to understand. Who's more effective from a mental health perspective?

Mills: Well, Dr. Briggs, I want to thank you so much for joining me today. This has been very interesting.

Biggs: Thank you. Thank you for having me.

Mills: You can find previous episodes of Speaking of Psychology on our website at www.speakingofpsychology.org or on Apple, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts. If you have comments or ideas for future podcasts, you can email us at speakingofpsychology@apa.org. Speaking of Psychology is produced by Lea Winerman. Our sound editor is Chris Condayan.

Thank you for listening. For the American Psychological Association, I'm Kim Mills.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Speaking of Psychology: Abortion and mental health, with Antonia Biggs, PhD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Antonia Biggs, PhD, talks about the results of The Turnaway Study, which examined how receiving an abortion-or being denied one-affects mental health and well-being, the effects of laws that limit access to abortion, and what a post-Roe future might look like.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Abortion ruling prompts variety of reactions from states

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 24 overturned Roe v. Wade , the 1973 decision that had provided a constitutional right to abortion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The new landscape of abortion rights in America

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On July 12, the Center for Effective Public Management at Brookings will explore the new landscape of abortion rights in America and its impacts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's been one week since the US Supreme Court revoked Americans' constitutional right to abortion, overturning 50 years of precedent.

The high court's decision has set off legal battles in multiple states, resulting in America's abortion landscape becoming more fragmented and increasingly complex.

Here's where the states currently stand on the issue, and what might happen next.

Some states have trigger laws in place

Trigger laws automatically restricted or removed access to abortion once Roe v Wade was overturned.

Some of the trigger laws ban abortions almost completely, while others outlaw abortion after six weeks or 15 weeks.

How quickly the trigger laws will go into effect will vary from state to state.

The following states have passed laws that severely restrict abortion access, with the states in bold completely banning the procedure:

In Idaho, a complete abortion ban was signed into law, but is not yet in effect.

Wyoming also has trigger laws, but has 30 days to review the bill before certifying it.

North Carolina has not immediately responded to its trigger laws.

Some states will enact laws soon

Mississippi is scheduled to completely ban abortions from July 7.

Meanwhile, laws restricting abortions in Arizona are set to take effect on July 23.

The situation is changing rapidly in some states

In Kentucky, Judge Mitch Perry issued a temporary restraining order preventing the state from enforcing a ban passed in 2019 and triggered by the Supreme Court's decision.

In Louisiana, abortion services resumed after District Court Judge Robin Giarrusso also issued a temporary restraining order blocking the state from carrying out its ban.

A Utah judge has temporarily blocked that state's near-total abortion ban, after Planned Parenthood challenged that state's trigger law that contains narrow exceptions.

In Florida, Circuit Court Judge John Cooper said he would grant a petition from abortion rights groups to temporarily put on hold a state law that would bar abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy.

In Texas, an abortion ban has been blocked, but another law that severely restricts abortion access is in effect.

Where is abortion still legal?

The Guttmacher Institute estimates 26 states are certain or likely to ban abortion, leaving women in large areas of the US south-west and Midwest without nearby access to the medical procedure.

Most states where abortion will still be legal are on the west coast in California, Nevada, Oregon and Washington, or in the north-east.

Illinois is now an island for abortion access, with four of the state's neighbours immediately banning abortion after the Supreme Court's decision, with two other states restricting the procedure.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul says "just a handful of states" are going to have to take care of health of women across the country.

It's currently legal for Americans to travel interstate to access an abortion, but US President Joe Biden predicts some jurisdictions will try to arrest those crossing state lines.

Planned Parenthood in Montana has alreadystopped providing medication abortions to patients who live in states with bans in place "to minimise potential risk for providers, health centre staff, and patients in the face of a rapidly changing landscape".

Mr Biden said the federal government would act to protect women who need to travel to get an abortion and ensure their access to medication in states where it's banned.

What might happen next?

He says he is " looking at all the alternatives" for protecting abortion access following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade.

During a meeting with Democratic governors, Mr Biden described the ruling as "tragic" and warned that Republicans could try to enact a nationwide ban on abortion if they retake control of Congress.

He said there were not enough votes in the Senate to scrap a super-majority rule known as the filibuster to codify Roe v Wade's protections into law.

Mr Biden said "a filibuster should not stand in the way of us being able to (codify Roe)."

Critics say the filibuster, which requires 60 of the 100 senators to agree on most legislation, is an anti-democratic hurdle that prevents Washington from addressing pressing problems.

Mr Biden urged Democrats to elect at least two more senators so they could create an exception to the filibuster.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul suggested Mr Biden consider having abortions performed at federal facilities like Veterans Affairs hospitals or military bases in states that restrict abortions.

New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham said Native American tribes, which have a level of sovereignty over their own lands, could also be valuable partners.
ABC/wires

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This is what America's abortion landscape looks like one week post-Roe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's been one week since the US Supreme Court revoked Americans' constitutional right to abortion, overturning 50 years of precedent. The high court's decision has set off legal battles in multiple states, resulting in America's abortion landscape becoming more fragmented and increasingly complex. Here's where the states currently stand on the issue, and what might happen next.

# data[].attributes.body
who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/abortion

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Overview

Around 73 million induced abortions take place worldwide each year. Six out of 10 (61%) of all unintended pregnancies, and 3 out of 10 (29%) of all pregnancies, end in induced abortion (1).

Comprehensive abortion care is included in the list of essential health care services published by WHO in 2020. Abortion is a simple health care intervention that can be effectively managed by a wide range of health workers using medication or a surgical procedure. In the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, a medical abortion can also be safely self-managed by the pregnant person outside of a health care facility (e.g., at home), in whole or in part. This requires that the woman has access to accurate information, quality medicines and support from a trained health worker (if she needs or wants it during the process).

Comprehensive abortion care includes the provision of information, abortion management and post-abortion care. It encompasses care related to miscarriage (spontaneous abortion and missed abortion), induced abortion (the deliberate interruption of an ongoing pregnancy by medical or surgical means), incomplete abortion as well as fetal death (intrauterine fetal demise). The information in this fact sheet focuses on care related to induced abortion.

Scope of the problem

When carried out using a method recommended by WHO appropriate to the pregnancy duration, and by someone with the necessary skills, abortion is a safe health care intervention.

However, when people with unintended pregnancies face barriers to attaining safe, timely, affordable, geographically reachable, respectful and non-discriminatory abortion, they often resort to unsafe abortion.

Global estimates from 2010-2014 demonstrate that 45% of all induced abortions are unsafe. Of all unsafe abortions, one third were performed under the least safe conditions, i.e., by untrained persons using dangerous and invasive methods.

Developing countries bear the burden of 97% of all unsafe abortions. More than half of all unsafe abortions occur in Asia, most of them in south and central Asia. In Latin American and Africa, the majority (approximately 3 out of 4) of all abortions are unsafe. In Africa, nearly half of all abortions occur under the least safe circumstances (2).

Consequences of inaccessible quality abortion care

Lack of access to safe, affordable, timely and respectful abortion care, and the stigma associated with abortion, pose risks to women's physical and mental well-being throughout the life-course.

Inaccessibility of quality abortion care risks violating a range of human rights of women and girls, including the right to life; the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health; the right to benefit from scientific progress and its realization; the right to decide freely and responsibly on the number, spacing and timing of children; and the right to be free from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment.

Each year, 4.7-13.2% of maternal deaths can be attributed to unsafe abortion (3). In developed regions, it is estimated that 30 women die for every 100 000 unsafe abortions. In developing regions, that number rises to 220 deaths per 100 000 unsafe abortions(2). Estimates from 2012 indicate that in developing countries alone, 7 million women per year were treated in hospital facilities for complications of unsafe abortion (4).

Physical health risks associated with unsafe abortion include:

incomplete abortion (failure to remove or expel all pregnancy tissue from the uterus);

haemorrhage (heavy bleeding);

infection;

uterine perforation (caused when the uterus is pierced by a sharp object); and

damage to the genital tract and internal organs as a consequence of inserting dangerous objects into the vagina or anus.

Restrictive abortion regulation can cause distress and stigma, and risk constituting a violation of human rights of women and girls, including the right to privacy and the right to non-discrimination and equality, while also imposing financial burdens on women and girls. Regulations that force women to travel to attain legal care, or require mandatory counselling or waiting periods, lead to loss of income and other financial costs, and can make abortion inaccessible to women with low resources (5, 6).

Estimates from 2006 show that complications of unsafe abortions cost health systems in developing countries US$ 553 million per year for post-abortion treatments. In addition, households experienced US$ 922 million in loss of income due to long-term disability related to unsafe abortion (8). Countries and health systems could make substantial monetary savings by providing greater access to modern contraception and quality induced abortion (6, 7).

A set of scoping reviews from 2021 indicate that abortion regulations - by being linked to fertility - affect women's education, participation on the labour market and positive contribution to GDP growth. The legal status of abortion can also affect children's educational outcomes, and their earnings on the labour market later in life. For example, legalization of abortion - by reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies and thus increasing the likelihood that children are born wanted - can be linked to greater parental investments in children, including in girls' schooling (7).

Expanding quality abortion care

Evidence shows that restricting access to abortions does not reduce the number of abortions (1); however, it does affect whether the abortions that women and girls attain are safe and dignified. The proportion of unsafe abortions are significantly higher in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws than in countries with less restrictive laws(2).

Barriers to accessing safe and respectful abortion include high costs, stigma for those seeking abortions and health care workers, and the refusal of health workers to provide an abortion based on personal conscience or religious belief. Access is further impeded by restrictive laws and requirements that are not medically justified, including criminalization of abortion, mandatory waiting periods, provision of biased information or counselling, third-party authorization and restrictions regarding the type of health care providers or facilities that can provide abortion services.

Multiple actions are needed at the legal, health system and community levels so that everyone who needs abortion care has access to it. The three cornerstones of an enabling environment for quality comprehensive abortion care are:

respect for human rights, including a supportive framework of law and policy;

the availability and accessibility of information; and

a supportive, universally accessible, affordable and well functioning health system.

A well functioning health system implies many factors, including:

evidence-based policies;

universal health coverage;

the reliable supply of quality, affordable medical products and equipment;

that an adequate number of health workers, of different types, provide abortion care at a reachable distance to patients;

the delivery of abortion care through a variety of approaches, e.g., care in health facilities, digital interventions and self-care approaches, allowing for choices depending on the values and preferences of the pregnant person, available resources, and the national and local context;

that health workers are trained to provide safe and respectful abortion care, to support informed decision-making and to interpret laws and policies regulating abortion;

that health workers are supported and protected from stigma; and

provision of contraception to prevent unintended pregnancies.

Availability and accessibility of information implies:

provision of evidence-based comprehensive sexuality education; and

accurate, non-biased and evidence-based information on abortion and contraceptive methods.

WHO response

WHO provides global technical and policy guidance on the use of contraception to prevent unintended pregnancy, provision of information on abortion care, abortion management (including miscarriage, induced abortion, incomplete abortion and fetal death) and post-abortion care. In 2021, WHO published an updated, consolidated guideline on abortion care, including all WHO recommendations and best practice statements across three domains essential to the provision of abortion care: law and policy, clinical services and service delivery.

WHO also maintains the Global Abortion Policies Database. This interactive online database contains comprehensive information on the abortion laws, policies, health standards and guidelines for all countries.

Upon request, WHO provides technical support to countries to adapt sexual and reproductive health guidelines to specific contexts and strengthen national policies and programmes related to contraception and safe abortion care. A quality abortion care monitoring and evaluation framework is also in development.

WHO is a cosponsor of the HRP (UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction), which carries out research on clinical care, abortion regulation, abortion stigma, as well as implementation research on community and health systems approaches to quality abortion care. It also monitors the global burden of unsafe abortion and its consequences.

1. Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, Moller A-B, Tunçalp Ö, Beavin C et al. Unintended pregnancy and abortion by income, region, and the legal status of abortion: estimates from a comprehensive model for 1990-2019. Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Sep; 8(9):e1152-e1161. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30315-6.

2. Ganatra B, Gerdts C, Rossier C, Johnson Jr B R, Tuncalp Ö, Assifi A et al. Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010-14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model. The Lancet. 2017 Sep.

3. Say L, Chou D, Gemmill A, Tunçalp Ö, Moller AB, Daniels J et al. Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2014 Jun; 2(6):e323-33.

4. Singh S, Maddow-Zimet I. Facility-based treatment for medical complications resulting from unsafe pregnancy termination in the developing world, 2012: a review of evidence from 26 countries. BJOG 2015; published online Aug 19. DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.13552.

5. Coast E, Lattof SR, Meulen Rodgers YV, Moore B, Poss C. The microeconomics of abortion: A scoping review and analysis of the economic consequences for abortion care-seekers. PLoS One. 2021 Jun 9;16(6):e0252005. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252005. PMID: 34106927; PMCID: PMC8189560.

6. Lattof SR, Coast E, Rodgers YVM, Moore B, Poss C. The mesoeconomics of abortion: A scoping review and analysis of the economic effects of abortion on health systems. PLoS One. 2020 Nov 4;15(11):e0237227. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237227. PMID: 33147223; PMCID: PMC7641432.

7. Rodgers YVM, Coast E, Lattof SR, Poss C, Moore B. The macroeconomics of abortion: A scoping review and analysis of the costs and outcomes. PLoS One. 2021 May 6;16(5):e0250692. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250692. PMID: 33956826; PMCID: PMC8101771.

8. Vlassoff et al. Economic impact of unsafe abortion-related morbidity and mortality: evidence and estimation challenges. Brighton, Institute of Development Studies, 2008 (IDS Research Reports 59).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Around 73 million induced abortions take place worldwide each year. Six out of 10 (61%) of all unintended pregnancies, and 3 out of 10 (29%) of all pregnancies, end in induced abortion (1). Comprehensive abortion care is included in the list of essential health care services published by WHO in 2020.

# data[].attributes.body
https://sdg-tracker.org/good-health#:~:text=Maternal%20mortality%20ratio,-Definition%3A%20Indicator%203.1&text=Goal%3A%20By%202030%20Reduce%20global,140%20per%20100%2C000%20live%20births.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The UN explains: "Significant strides have been made in increasing life expectancy and reducing some of the common killers responsible for child and maternal mortality.
Major progress has also been made on increasing access to clean water and sanitation, reducing malaria, tuberculosis, polio and the spread of HIV/AIDS. However, many more efforts are needed to control a wide range of diseases and address many different persistent and emerging health issues."
In-depth analysis across a range of health-related topics can be found at the Our World in Data entries on:

Global Health,

Polio,

Life Expectancy,

Maternal Mortality,

Child Mortality,

Malaria,

HIV/AIDS,

Suicide,

Burden of Disease,

Eradication of Diseases,

Causes of Death,

Financing Healthcare,

Smoking.

The UN has defined 13 Targets and 28 Indicators for SDG 3. Targets specify the goals and Indicators represent the metrics by which the world aims to track whether these Targets are achieved. Below we quote the original text of all Targets and show the data on the agreed Indicators.

How is the world doing on this goal?

SDG Indicator 3.3.1

Number of new HIV infections per 1,000 uninfected population, by sex, age and key populations

Definition: Indicator 3.3.1 is the number of new HIV infections per 1,000 uninfected population.

This is shown as the number of new cases of HIV per year amongst uninfected adults per 1,000 people aged 15-49.

Goal: The target 2030 is to end the epidemic of HIV across all countries. The targeted level of reduction, however, is not defined.

UNAIDS has set a target (not specifically related to the SDGs) of reducing to less than 200,000 new infections globally among adults by 2030. This would mean a reduction to 0.02 new cases per 1,000 people globally in 2030.

SDG Indicator 3.3.3

Malaria incidence per 1,000 population

Definition: Indicator 3.3.3 is malaria incidence per 1,000 population.

Malaria incidence is the number of new cases of malaria in one year per 1,000 people in a given population.

Goal: By 2030 end the epidemic of malaria in all countries. The targeted level of reduction, however, is not defined.

The WHO Global Technical Strategy has set a target of reducing incidence by 90 percent by 2030. This would infer a target of 9 or fewer cases of malaria per 1,000 people globally in 2030.

SDG Indicator 3.6.1

Halve the number of road traffic deaths

Definition: Indicator 3.6.1 is the death rate due to road traffic injuries.

Mortality from road traffic injuries is measured here in absolute (total number of deaths) and rates (deaths per 100,000 population). Road traffic deaths include vehicle drivers, passengers, motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians.

Goal: By 2020 halve the number of global deaths and injuries from road traffic accidents.

While most SDG targets are set for 2030, this is set to be achieved for 2020.

Note that the SDG Indicator is the rate of road deaths while the target is set for the absolute number of road deaths. Because of this we show both metrics.

Additional charts:
Road traffic deaths by user

SDG Indicator 3.B.1

Vaccine coverage

Definition: Indicator 3.B.1 is the proportion of the target population covered by all vaccines included in their national programme.

The UN currently includes the four following vaccines in this indicator:
three-dose diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus (DPT3); second-dose measles vaccine; recommended dose of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV3) and recommended dose of human papillomavirus vaccine

Goal: By 2030 provide access to affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all.

For this indicator, this means universal coverage of the vaccines noted above (if included in national vaccination programmes) must be achieved by 2030.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Goal 3: Good Health and Well-Being - SDG Tracker

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The UN explains: "Significant strides have been made in increasing life expectancy and reducing some of the common killers responsible for child and maternal mortality. Major progress has also been made on increasing access to clean water and sanitation, reducing malaria, tuberculosis, polio and the spread of HIV/AIDS.