%0 Journal Article
%T Unintended Pregnancies, Restrictive Abortion Laws, and Abortion Demand
%A Marshall H. Medoff
%J ISRN Economics
%D 2012
%R 10.5402/2012/612081
%X This study examines the effect restrictive state abortion laws have on the pregnancy resolution decisions of women with unintended pregnancies. The empirical results find that the abortion ratio and the abortion rate of unintended pregnancies are more sensitive to increases in the abortion price than previous estimates that analyzed total pregnancies (unintended and intended). A Medicaid funding restriction has very little effect on a state's abortion rate of unintended pregnancies, but causes a larger decrease in the number of abortions of unintended pregnancies than previous estimates. A parental involvement law is associated with a significant reduction in a state's abortion ratio and the abortion rate of unintended pregnancies, which suggests that the law may have a behavioral modification effect. Neither a mandatory counseling law nor a two-visit law has a significant effect on a state's abortion ratio and the abortion rate of unintended pregnancies. 1. Introduction The U.S. Supreme Court¡¯s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion recognized that states have the right to regulate the procedure. The Court ruled that, during the first trimester of pregnancy, states could not enact any laws that restricted a woman¡¯s access to an abortion. During the second trimester, states could enact laws regulating abortion access, but only if the law had a compelling interest in protecting a pregnant woman¡¯s maternal health. During the third trimester, when the fetus is viable, states could enact laws restricting or even prohibiting abortions provided there was a medical exception to protect the life or health of the pregnant woman. In 1992, the Supreme Court in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey rejected Roe¡¯s rigid trimester pregnancy framework of state abortion regulation and replaced it with the ¡°undue burden¡± standard. The Court declared that states could impose restrictions on a woman¡¯s access to an abortion provided that the state law or regulation did not have ¡°¡­ the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus.¡± Restrictive state abortion laws may influence the likelihood of women terminating an unintended pregnancy in two ways. First, restrictive abortion laws increase the financial costs (e.g., out-of-pocket expenses on travel and accommodations, the price of the abortion procedure, lost work time, and childcare expenses) and the emotional costs (e.g., guilt, psychological trauma, remorse, regret, and humiliation) incurred by women seeking an abortion.
%U http://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn.economics/2012/612081/