Border-state abortions increased for Texas residents after House Bill 2

Abortion patients' decision making about where to obtain out-of-state care following Texas' 2021 abortion ban

OBJECTIVE

To assess pregnant Texans' decisions about where to obtain out-of-state abortion care following the September 2021 implementation of Senate Bill 8 (SB8), which prohibited abortions after detectable embryonic cardiac activity.

DATA SOURCE

In-depth telephone interviews with Texas residents ≥15 years of age who obtained out-of-state abortion care after SB8's implementation.

STUDY DESIGN

This qualitative study explored participants' experiences identifying and contacting abortion facilities and their concerns and considerations about traveling out of state. We used inductive and deductive codes in our thematic analysis describing people's decisions about where to obtain care and how they evaluated available options.

DATA COLLECTION

Texas residents self-referred to the study from flyers we provided to abortion facilities in Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. We also enrolled participants from a concurrent online survey of Texans seeking abortion care.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Participants (n = 65) frequently obtained referral lists for out-of-state locations from health-care providers, and a few received referrals to specific facilities; however, referrals rarely included the information people needed to decide where to obtain care. More than half of the participants prioritized getting the soonest appointment and often contacted multiple locations and traveled further to do so; others who could not travel further typically waited longer for an appointment. Although the participants rarely cited state abortion restrictions or cost of care as their main reason for choosing a location, they often made sacrifices to lessen the logistical and economic hardships that state restrictions and out-of-state travel costs created. Informative abortion facility websites and compassionate scheduling staff solidified some participants' facility choice.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnant Texans made difficult trade-offs and experienced travel-related burdens to obtain out-of-state abortion care. As abortion bans prohibit more people from obtaining in-state care, efforts to strengthen patient navigation are needed to reduce care-seeking burdens as this will support people's reproductive autonomy.

Characteristics of U.S. Abortion Patients Who Obtained Care Out of State Prior to the Overturning of Roe v. Wade

CONTEXT

In light of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision overturning Roe v. Wade, the number of people who need to travel out of state for abortion is increasing as several states impose abortion bans. Better understanding the characteristics of patients who obtained out-of-state abortions before the decision can provide a reference point for future research and inform efforts to improve abortion access.

METHODS

We used data from the 2014 Abortion Patient Survey, administered by the Guttmacher Institute, to examine the prevalence and characteristics of patients obtaining nonhospital abortions outside of their state of residence. We examined bivariate and multivariable associations between selected characteristics and obtaining an abortion out of state.

RESULTS

Six percent of abortion patients traveled out of state for care. Among patients who obtained their abortion out of state, more than half (56.9%) were non-Hispanic (NH) white, 26.6% were non-Hispanic Black, and 10.2% were Hispanic. Two-fifths (43.9%) resided in the South, one-third (34.3%) resided in the Midwest, 15% resided in the Northeast, and 7% resided in the West. More than one-third (38.2%) had family incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level (FPL), and two-thirds (67.7%) paid out of pocket; only 3% used Medicaid. Profiles of out-of-state abortion patients differed from in-state abortion patients by all characteristics except age. In adjusted analyses, NH Black (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-0.96), NH Asian, South Asian, and Asian Pacific Islander (AOR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20-0.67), and Hispanic (AOR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.33-0.64) patients had lower odds of traveling out of state compared with their NH white counterparts. Compared with those paying for their abortion with private insurance, those who paid out of pocket had higher odds of traveling out of state (AOR: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.29-2.37) and those paying with Medicaid had lower odds (AOR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.15-0.47).

CONCLUSION

Given the observed differences by race/ethnicity and method of payment for abortion, people of color and those without resources to pay out of pocket may especially benefit from efforts to support access to abortion care via interstate travel as an increasing number of states ban abortion.

Abortion Surveillance - United States, 2021

Problem/Condition

CDC conducts abortion surveillance to document the number and characteristics of women obtaining legal induced abortions and number of abortion-related deaths in the United States.

Period Covered

2021.

Description of System

Each year, CDC requests abortion data from the central health agencies for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City. For 2021, a total of 48 reporting areas voluntarily provided aggregate abortion data to CDC. Of these, 47 reporting areas provided data each year during 2012-2021. Census and natality data were used to calculate abortion rates (number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years) and ratios (number of abortions per 1,000 live births), respectively. Abortion-related deaths from 2020 were assessed as part of CDC's Pregnancy Mortality Surveillance System (PMSS).

Results

A total of 625,978 abortions for 2021 were reported to CDC from 48 reporting areas. Among 47 reporting areas with data each year during 2012-2021, in 2021, a total of 622,108 abortions were reported, the abortion rate was 11.6 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years, and the abortion ratio was 204 abortions per 1,000 live births. From 2020 to 2021, the total number of abortions increased 5% (from 592,939 total abortions), the abortion rate increased 5% (from 11.1 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years), and the abortion ratio increased 4% (from 197 abortions per 1,000 live births). From 2012 to 2021, the total number of reported abortions decreased 8% (from 673,634), the abortion rate decreased 11% (from 13.1 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years), and the abortion ratio decreased 1% (from 207 abortions per 1,000 live births).In 2021, women in their 20s accounted for more than half of abortions (57.0%). Women aged 20-24 and 25-29 years accounted for the highest percentages of abortions (28.3% and 28.7%, respectively) and had the highest abortion rates (19.7 and 19.4 abortions per 1,000 women aged 20-24 and 25-29 years, respectively). By contrast, adolescents aged <15 years and women aged ≥40 years accounted for the lowest percentages of abortions (0.2% and 3.6%, respectively) and had the lowest abortion rates (0.4 and 2.5 abortions per 1,000 women aged <15 and ≥40 years, respectively). However, abortion ratios were highest among adolescents (aged ≤19 years) and lowest among women aged 30-39 years.From 2020 to 2021, abortion rates increased among women aged 20-39 years, decreased among adolescents aged 15-19 years, and did not change among adolescents aged <15 years and women aged ≥40 years. Abortion rates decreased from 2012 to 2021 among all age groups, except women aged 30-34 years for whom it increased. The decrease in the abortion rate from 2012 to 2021 was highest among adolescents compared with any other age group. From 2020 to 2021, abortion ratios increased for women aged 15-24 years, decreased among adolescents aged <15 years and women aged ≥35 years and did not change for women aged 25-34 years. From 2012 to 2021, abortion ratios increased among women aged 15-29 years and decreased among adolescents aged <15 years and women aged ≥30 years. The decrease in abortion ratio from 2012 to 2021 was highest among women aged ≥40 years compared with any other age group.In 2021, the majority (80.8%) of abortions were performed at ≤9 weeks' gestation, and nearly all (93.5%) were performed at ≤13 weeks' gestation. During 2012-2021, the percentage of abortions performed at >13 weeks' gestation remained ≤8.7%. In 2021, the highest percentage of abortions were performed by early medication abortion at ≤9 weeks' gestation (53.0%), followed by surgical abortion at ≤13 weeks' gestation (37.6%), surgical abortion at >13 weeks' gestation (6.4%), and medication abortion at >9 weeks' gestation (3.0%); all other methods were uncommon (<0.1%). Among those that were eligible (≤9 weeks' gestation), 66.6% of abortions were early medication abortions. In 2020, the most recent year for which PMSS data were reviewed for pregnancy-related deaths; six women died as a result of complications from legal induced abortion.

Interpretation

Among the 47 areas that reported data continuously during 2012-2021, overall decreases were observed during 2012-2021 in the total number, rate, and ratio of reported abortions; however, from 2020 to 2021, increases were observed across all measures.

Public Health Action

Abortion surveillance can be used to help evaluate programs aimed at promoting equitable access to patient-centered quality contraceptive services in the United States to reduce unintended pregnancies.

The potential impact of neighboring states' bans on abortion volume in a haven state

OBJECTIVES

We explored the potential impact of abortion bans in neighboring states on Michigan's abortion volume.

STUDY DESIGN

Using ArcGIS mapping software, we determined which counties in neighboring states had their closest out-of-state abortion clinic in Michigan. We estimated the change in abortions in Michigan occurring from neighboring states' residents, assuming complete bans in those states.

RESULTS

Complete bans in neighboring states could increase abortion volume in Michigan by approximately 5928 out-of-state patients annually (21% increase).

CONCLUSIONS

Complete bans in neighboring states may markedly increase abortions occurring in Michigan, which may strain Michigan facilities' capacity to provide abortion care.

Abortion assistance fund staff and volunteers as patient navigators following an abortion ban in Texas

CONTEXT

Abortion assistance funds constitute an important part of the healthcare safety net by covering some of abortion patients' out-of-pocket costs. Few studies have examined the other ways abortion assistance fund staff and volunteers support callers who need help obtaining care.

METHODS

Between June and September 2020, we conducted in-depth interviews with 23 staff and volunteers at 11 local abortion assistance funds that helped Texans seeking abortion care following a March 2020 state executive order that prohibited most abortions. Interviewers explored respondents' experiences with callers whose appointments had been canceled or who traveled out of state and subsequent operational changes. We used both inductive and deductive codes in the thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Abortion assistance fund staff and volunteers bridged callers' information gaps about the services and financial resources available and helped create plans to secure care that accounted for callers' specific needs. They provided emotional support so callers felt it was possible to overcome logistical hurdles to get an abortion, even if that required out-of-state travel. Respondents described greater collaboration between Texas-based abortion assistance funds and out-of-state organizations to support callers' more complex logistical needs and increased costs. Some callers who encountered multiple barriers to care, including interpersonal violence, were unable to obtain an abortion, even with additional supports.

CONCLUSIONS

Local abortion assistance funds worked with Texas callers to co-create person-centered plans for care and expanded inter-organization collaborations. Initiatives that bolster local assistance funds' infrastructure and capacity will be needed as the abortion access landscape becomes further restricted and complex.

Out-of-State Travel for Abortion among Texas Residents following an Executive Order Suspending In-State Services during the Coronavirus Pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, existing and new abortion restrictions constrained people's access to abortion care. We assessed Texas abortion patients' out-of-state travel patterns before and during implementation of a state executive order that prohibited most abortions for 30 days in 2020. We received data on Texans who obtained abortions between February and May 2020 at 25 facilities in six nearby states. We estimated weekly trends in the number of out-of-state abortions related to the order using segmented regression models. We compared the distribution of out-of-state abortions by county-level economic deprivation and distance traveled. The number of Texas out-of-state abortions increased 14% the week after (versus before) the order was implemented (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.14; 95% CI: 0.49, 2.63), and increased weekly while the order remained in effect (IRR = 1.64; 95% CI: 1.23, 2.18). Residents of the most economically disadvantaged counties accounted for 52% and 12% of out-of-state abortions before and during the order, respectively (p < 0.001). Before the order, 38% of Texans traveled ≥250 miles one way, whereas during the order 81% traveled ≥250 miles (p < 0.001). Texans' long-distance travel for out-of-state abortion care and the socioeconomic composition of those less likely to travel reflect potential burdens imposed by future abortion bans.

Association Between Publicly Funded Contraceptive Services and the Abortion Rate in Texas, 2010-2015

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how the availability of contraceptive services was associated with a change in the abortion rate before and after Texas' legislative changes to the family planning budget in 2011 and abortion access in 2013.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we obtained 2010 and 2015 data on contraceptive provision (number of publicly funded clinics and number of contraceptive clients served per 1,000 reproductive-aged women) from the Guttmacher Institute and county-level abortion data from the Texas Department of State Health Services. We categorized counties as having an abortion rate that increased or declined less than the national rate between 2010 and 2015 ( low-decline counties ) compared with those having an abortion rate that declined equal to or greater than the national rate between 2010 and 2015 ( high-decline counties ). We evaluated differences in contraceptive provision between high-decline and low-decline counties and evaluated county characteristics (racial and ethnic composition, unemployment, poverty, uninsured, education, distance to an abortion clinic, deliveries covered by Medicaid, and Catholic hospital marketplace dominance) as potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of 157 counties that had at least one contraceptive clinic in either 2010 or 2015, 49 were low-decline counties and 108 were high-decline counties. Although the total number of publicly funded family planning clinics increased by 10.8%, there was a 4.7% decrease in the total number of contraceptive clients served statewide. Compared with low-decline counties, high-decline counties had a higher median number of contraceptive clients served per 1,000 women aged 18-44 years (31.9 vs 60.7, P <.05) in 2015. Between 2010 and 2015, the abortion rate decreased 19.7% for each 1.0% increase in contraceptive clients served.

CONCLUSION

Texas counties with higher abortion-rate declines had more publicly funded contraceptive clinics and served more contraceptive clients than counties with lower declines, which may indicate the importance of greater access to publicly funded contraceptive services.

Abortion Surveillance - United States, 2020

Problem/Condition

CDC conducts abortion surveillance to document the number and characteristics of women obtaining legal induced abortions and number of abortion-related deaths in the United States.

Period Covered

2020.

Description of System

Each year, CDC requests abortion data from the central health agencies for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City. For 2020, a total of 49 reporting areas voluntarily provided aggregate abortion data to CDC. Of these, 48 reporting areas provided data each year during 2011-2020. Census and natality data were used to calculate abortion rates (number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years) and ratios (number of abortions per 1,000 live births), respectively. Abortion-related deaths from 2019 were assessed as part of CDC's Pregnancy Mortality Surveillance System (PMSS).

Results

A total of 620,327 abortions for 2020 were reported to CDC from 49 reporting areas. Among 48 reporting areas with data each year during 2011-2020, in 2020, a total of 615,911 abortions were reported, the abortion rate was 11.2 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years, and the abortion ratio was 198 abortions per 1,000 live births. From 2019 to 2020, the total number of abortions decreased 2% (from 625,346 total abortions), the abortion rate decreased 2% (from 11.4 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years), and the abortion ratio increased 2% (from 195 abortions per 1,000 live births). From 2011 to 2020, the total number of reported abortions decreased 15% (from 727,554), the abortion rate decreased 18% (from 13.7 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years), and the abortion ratio decreased 9% (from 217 abortions per 1,000 live births).In 2020, women in their 20s accounted for more than half of abortions (57.2%). Women aged 20-24 and 25-29 years accounted for the highest percentages of abortions (27.9% and 29.3%, respectively) and had the highest abortion rates (19.2 and 19.0 abortions per 1,000 women aged 20-24 and 25-29 years, respectively). By contrast, adolescents aged <15 years and women aged ≥40 years accounted for the lowest percentages of abortions (0.2% and 3.7%, respectively) and had the lowest abortion rates (0.4 and 2.6 abortions per 1,000 women aged <15 and ≥40 years, respectively). However, abortion ratios were highest among adolescents (aged ≤19 years) and lowest among women aged 25-39 years.Abortion rates decreased from 2011 to 2020 among all age groups. The decrease in abortion rate was highest among adolescents compared with any other age group. From 2019 to 2020, abortion rates decreased or did not change for all age groups. Abortion ratios decreased from 2011 to 2020 for all age groups, except adolescents aged 15-19 years and women aged 25-29 years for whom abortion ratios increased. The decrease in abortion ratio was highest among women aged ≥40 years compared with any other age group. From 2019 to 2020, abortion ratios decreased for adolescents aged <15 years and women aged ≥35 and increased for women 15-34 years.In 2020, 80.9% of abortions were performed at ≤9 weeks' gestation, and nearly all (93.1%) were performed at ≤13 weeks' gestation. During 2011-2020, the percentage of abortions performed at >13 weeks' gestation remained consistently low (≤9.2%). In 2020, the highest percentage of abortions were performed by early medical abortion at ≤9 weeks' gestation (51.0%), followed by surgical abortion at ≤13 weeks' gestation (40.0%), surgical abortion at >13 weeks' gestation (6.7%), and medical abortion at >9 weeks' gestation (2.4%); all other methods were uncommon (<0.1%). Among those that were eligible (≤9 weeks' gestation), 63.9% of abortions were early medical abortions. In 2019, the most recent year for which PMSS data were reviewed for pregnancy-related deaths, four women died as a result of complications from legal induced abortion.

Interpretation

Among the 48 areas that reported data continuously during 2011-2020, overall decreases were observed during 2011-2020 in the total number, rate, and ratio of reported abortions. From 2019 to 2020, decreases also were observed in the total number and rate of reported abortions; however, a 2% increase was observed in the total abortion ratio.

Public Health Action

Abortion surveillance can be used to help evaluate programs aimed at promoting equitable access to patient-centered quality contraceptive services in the United States to reduce unintended pregnancies.

Association of Texas' 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy With the Number of Facility-Based Abortions in Texas and Surrounding States

IMPORTANCE

Texas' 2021 ban on abortion in early pregnancy may demonstrate how patterns of abortion might change following the US Supreme Court's June 2022 decision overturning Roe v Wade.

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in the number of abortions and changes in the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents performed at 12 or more weeks of gestation in the first 6 months following implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB 8), which prohibited abortions after detection of embryonic cardiac activity.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective study of a sample of 50 Texas and out-of-state abortion facilities using an interrupted time series analysis to assess changes in the number of abortions, and Poisson regression to assess changes in abortions at 12 or more weeks of gestation. Data included 68 820 Texas facility-based abortions and 11 287 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents during the study period from September 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022.

EXPOSURES

Abortion care obtained after (September 2021-February 2022) vs before (September 2020-August 2021) implementation of SB 8.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were changes in the number of facility-based abortions for Texas residents, in Texas and out of state, in the month after implementation of SB 8 compared with the month before. The secondary outcome was the change in the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation during the 6-month period after the law's implementation.

RESULTS

Between September 2020 and August 2021, there were 55 018 abortions in Texas and 2547 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents. During the 6 months after SB 8, there were 13 802 abortions in Texas and 8740 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents. Compared with the month before implementation of SB 8, the number of Texas facility-based abortions significantly decreased from 5451 to 2169 (difference, -3282 [95% CI, -3171 to -3396]; incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.36-0.51]) in the month after SB 8 was implemented. The number of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents significantly increased from 222 to 1332 (difference, 1110 [95% CI, 1047-1177]; IRR, 5.38 [95% CI, 4.19-6.91]). Overall, the total documented number of Texas facility-based and out-of-state abortions among Texas residents significantly decreased from 5673 to 3501 (absolute change, -2172 [95% CI, -2083 to -2265]; IRR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56-0.79]) in the first month after SB 8 was implemented compared with the previous month. Out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation increased from 17.1% (221/1291) to 31.0% (399/1289) (difference, 178 [95% CI, 153-206]) during the period between September 2021 and February 2022 (P < .001 for trend).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among a sample of abortion facilities, the 2021 Texas law banning abortion in early pregnancy (SB 8) was significantly associated with a decrease in the documented total of facility-based abortions in Texas and obtained by Texas residents in surrounding states in the first month after implementation compared with the previous month. Over the 6 months following SB 8 implementation, the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation significantly increased.

How Ohio's proposed abortion bans would impact travel distance to access abortion care

CONTEXT

Since March 2021, the Ohio legislature has been actively considering laws that would ban abortion if the United States Supreme Court overturns the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationally in 1973.

METHODS

We used a national database of publicly advertised abortion facilities to calculate driving distances for Ohioans before and after the activation of proposed abortion bans. Using a legal analysis of abortion laws following the overturn of Roe, we determined which states surrounding Ohio would continue providing abortion care. We calculated distances from each Ohio county centroid to the nearest open abortion facility in three scenarios: (1) as of February 2022, (2) the best-case post-Roe scenario (two of the five surrounding states continue to offer abortion care), and (3) worst-case post-Roe scenario (no surrounding states continue to offer abortion care). We calculated population-weighted distances using county-level data about women aged 15-44 years from the 2019 American Community Survey.

RESULTS

In February 2022, all Ohio county centroids were at most 99 miles from an abortion facility (median = 50 miles). The best-case post-Roe scenario shows 62 of Ohio's 88 counties to be 115-279 miles away from the nearest facility (median = 146). The worst-case shows 85 counties to be 191-339 miles away from the nearest facility (median = 264). The current average population-weighted driving distance from county centroid to the nearest facility is 26 miles; the post-Roe scenarios would increase this to 157 miles (best-case) or 269 miles (worst-case).

CONCLUSIONS

Ohio's proposed abortion bans would substantially increase travel distances to abortion care, impacting over 2.2 million reproductive-aged Ohioans.

Abortion travel within the United States: An observational study of cross-state movement to obtain abortion care in 2017

Background

In the United States, abortion access is often more limited for people who live in states with few abortion facilities and restrictive abortion legislation. Pregnant people seeking an abortion thus often travel to access care.

Methods

We calculated state-specific abortion rate (number of abortions per thousand women ages 15 to 44) and percentage of patients leaving for abortion care using CDC 2017 Abortion Surveillance data, the Guttmacher Institute's Abortion Provider Census and Pregnancies, Births and Abortions in the United States report, and US Census data. We categorized percent leaving by abortion policy landscape using the Guttmacher Institute's classification of state abortion laws, and by facility density (number of abortion facilities per million women ages 15 to 44), calculated using Census and Guttmacher data. We ran correlational tests between each of our variables (percent leaving, facility density, and policy environment), as well as between percent leaving and facility density within policy environment.

Findings

In 2017, an average of 8% of US patients left their state of residence for abortion care. Percent leaving varied widely by state: 74% left Wyoming, 57% left South Carolina, and 56% left Missouri, while 13 states had fewer than 4% of patients leaving. States with more restrictive laws averaged 12% of patients leaving, while states with middle ground or supportive laws averaged 10% and 3% leaving, respectively. Pairwise correlations between percent leaving, facility density, and policy score were all statistically significant, though correlations between percent leaving and facility density within policy environment were not.

Interpretation

Many patients travel across state lines for abortion care. While patients may leave for a range of reasons, restrictive state-level abortion policy and facility scarcity are associated with patients leaving their state of residence.

Funding

This study was supported by a philanthropic foundation that makes grants anonymously.