Love the fetus, could care less about the baby and mom.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/28/u...-services.html
States With Abortion Bans Are Among Least Supportive for Mothers and Children
They tend to have the weakest social services and the worst results in several categories of health and well-being.
By Emily Badger, Margot Sanger-Katz and Claire Cain MillerGraphics by Eve Washington
July 28, 2022
How Women and Children Fare
States hostile to abortion fare worse on a variety of health and well-being outcomes, while states supportive of abortion rights tend to have a more generous social safety net.
WHERE ABORTION IS ...
OUTCOME BANNED OR LIKELY TO BE (24 STATES) UNLIKELY TO BE BANNED (20 STATES)
Children in poverty
Pct. below poverty line
18.5% 14.8%
Uninsured women
Pct. of women of reproductive age without health insurance
15.7% 9.0%
Uninsured children
Pct. of children without health insurance
7.2% 3.6%
Low-birthweight babies
Pct. of babies born weighing less than 2.5 kg (5.5 lbs.)
8.8% 7.7%
Teen births
Births per 1,000 females age 15 to 19
21.2 12.1
Infant mortality
Deaths per 1,000 live births
6.3 4.7
Maternal mortality
Deaths per 100,000 live births
25.2 15.0
POLICY BANNED OR LIKELY TO BE (24 STATES) UNLIKELY TO BE BANNED (20 STATES)
Paid family leave
Offer paid family leave
0
STATES
11
STATES
Expanded Medicaid
Expanded Medicaid under Obamacare to cover poor, childless adults
15
STATES
20
STATES
Min. wage above $7.25
Above the federal floor
8
STATES
19
STATES
Universal pre-K
Committed to offering universal pre-K
6
STATES
6
STATES
Groups with larger rates are highlighted.
The table excludes data from six states — N.C., Fla., Kan., Pa., Va. and Mont. — where the future legal status of abortion is least clear.
In Mississippi, which brought the abortion case that ended Roe v. Wade before the Supreme Court, Gov. Tate Reeves vowed that the state would now “take every step necessary to support mothers and children.”
Today, however, Mississippi fares poorly on just about any measure of that goal. Its infant and maternal mortality rates are among the worst in the nation.
State leaders have rejected the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion, leaving an estimated 43,000 women of reproductive age without health insurance. They have chosen not to extend Medicaid to women for a full year after giving birth. And they have a welfare program that gives some of the country’s least generous cash assistance — a maximum of $260 a month for a poor mother raising two children.
Mississippi embodies a national pattern: States that have banned abortion, or are expected to, have among the nation’s weakest social services for women and children, and have higher rates of death for infants and mothers.
According to a New York Times analysis, the 24 states that have banned abortion (or probably will) fare worse on a broad range of outcomes than states where abortion will probably remain legal, including child and maternal mortality, teenage birthrates and the share of women and children who are uninsured. The states likely to ban abortion either have laws predating Roe that ban abortion; have recently passed stringent restrictions; or have legislatures that are actively considering new bans.
The majority of these states have turned down the yearlong Medicaid postpartum extension. Nine have declined the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion, which provides health care to the poor. None offer new parents paid leave from work to care for their newborns.
“The safety net is woefully inadequate,” said Carol Burnett, who works with poor and single mothers as executive director of the Mississippi Low-Income Child Care Initiative, a nonprofit. “All of these demonstrated state-level obstacles prevent moms from getting the help they need, the health care they need, the child care they need.”
How States Rank on Measures of Well-Being for Women and Children
Poverty and mortality measures for mothers and babies are worse in states that have banned abortion or are likely to do so.
BETTER RANK
WORSE RANK
10th20th30th40th
Banned or likely to ban abortion
STATE UNINSURED WOMEN MATERNAL MORTALITY INFANT MORTALITY CHILD POVERTY
Miss. 48th 45th 50th 50th
Okla. 49th 37th 46th 41st
Ala. 38th 48th 48th 45th
Ga. 45th 43rd 45th 38th
Ark. 33rd 50th 47th 46th
La. 28th 46th 49th 49th
S.C. 37th 44th 44th 42nd
Tenn. 34th 47th 43rd 43rd
Texas 50th 34th 21st 39th
S.D. 42nd 25th* 37th 26th
Mo. 40th 38th 34th 30th
W.Va. 13th 32nd* 40th 44th
Ariz. 39th 42nd 20th 37th
Wyo. 47th 16th* 35th 13th
Ohio 16th 28th 42nd 36th
Ind. 30th 41st 39th 23rd
Ky. 15th 49th 18th 47th
Mich. 9th 23rd 36th 34th
Idaho 44th 19th* 10th 15th
Wis. 11th 4th* 29th 22nd
N.D. 19th 33rd* 38th 2nd
Neb. 26th 40th 19th 7th
Utah 31st 7th* 17th 3rd
Iowa 2nd 8th* 14th 16th
May ban abortion
STATE UNINSURED WOMEN MATERNAL MORTALITY INFANT MORTALITY CHILD POVERTY
N.C. 43rd 27th 41st 40th
Fla. 46th 29th 30th 33rd
Kan. 36th 30th 33rd 24th
Pa. 10th 15th 25th 32nd
Va. 25th 31st 24th 18th
Mont. 23rd 35th* 12th 25th
Unlikely to ban abortion
STATE UNINSURED WOMEN MATERNAL MORTALITY INFANT MORTALITY CHILD POVERTY
N.M. 32nd 14th* 23rd 48th
Nev. 41st 22nd 26th 31st
Ill. 20th 9th 32nd 29th
Del. 14th 17th* 31st 28th
Alaska 35th 39th* 16th 14th
Maine 27th 3rd* 15th 20th
Calif. 22nd 6th 4th 27th
Md. 12th 21st 28th 9th
R.I. 5th 18th* 22nd 21st
N.Y. 7th 24th 5th 35th
N.J. 29th 36th 3rd 11th
Ore. 17th 12th* 8th 17th
Colo. 24th 11th 11th 5th
Hawaii 4th 10th* 27th 8th
Wash. 18th 26th 7th 12th
Conn. 8th 20th* 6th 19th
Minn. 6th 5th* 13th 6th
N.H. 21st 1st* 1st 1st
Vt. 3rd 2nd* 9th 4th
Mass. 1st 13th 2nd 10th
Ranks with asterisks are based on fewer than 20 deaths and may be unreliable. States with identical values are assigned sequential rankings in alphabetical order.
Many anti-abortion activists have acknowledged that improving the health and livelihoods of mothers and young children is an important goal for their movement: “This has been my lecture to the pro-life movement for the last year,” said Kristan Hawkins, the president of Students for Life. “No woman stands alone in the post-Roe America.”
But in many of these states, skepticism of government aid runs as deep as opposition to abortion. And racism has played a role over generations in weakening safety nets for all poor residents, researchers and historians say.
Studies have repeatedly found that states where the safety net is less generous and harder to access tend to be those with relatively more Black residents. That has further implications for Black women, who have a maternal mortality rate nationally that is nearly three times that of white women.
State Policies That Support Women and Children
States where abortion is expected to remain legal are more likely to have enacted policies that benefit families.
Banned or likely to ban abortion
STATE EXPANDED
MEDICAID PAID
LEAVE MIN.
WAGE+ UNIV.
PRE-K
Miss. ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕
S.C. ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕
Tenn. ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕
Texas ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕
Wyo. ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕
Ala. ✕ ✕ ✕ ✓
Ga. ✕ ✕ ✕ ✓
Idaho ✓ ✕ ✕ ✕
Ind. ✓ ✕ ✕ ✕
Ky. ✓ ✕ ✕ ✕
La. ✓ ✕ ✕ ✕
N.D. ✓ ✕ ✕ ✕
S.D. ✕ ✕ ✓ ✕
Utah ✓ ✕ ✕ ✕
Wis. ✕ ✕ ✕ ✓
Ariz. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Ark. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Iowa ✓ ✕ ✕ ✓
Mich. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Mo. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Neb. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Ohio ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Okla. ✓ ✕ ✕ ✓
W.Va. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✓
May ban abortion
STATE EXPANDED
MEDICAID PAID
LEAVE MIN.
WAGE+ UNIV.
PRE-K
Kan. ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕
N.C. ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕
Pa. ✓ ✕ ✕ ✕
Fla. ✕ ✕ ✓ ✓
Mont. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Va. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Unlikely to ban abortion
STATE EXPANDED
MEDICAID PAID
LEAVE MIN.
WAGE+ UNIV.
PRE-K
N.H. ✓ ✕ ✕ ✕
Alaska ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Hawaii ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Ill. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Minn. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Nev. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
N.M. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✕
Conn. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✕
Del. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✕
Maine ✓ ✕ ✓ ✓
Md. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✕
Mass. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✕
Ore. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✕
R.I. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✕
Vt. ✓ ✕ ✓ ✓
Wash. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✕
Calif. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Colo. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
N.J. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
N.Y. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
States that have committed to universal pre-K but have not yet implemented it are included. States with minimum wage+ are those that guarantee more than the federal $7.25 hourly minimum.
Social spending is not the only answer to poverty and poor public health, and some in the anti-abortion movement stress that they want to help women and children — just not with more government spending. But there is a strong link between state policy choices and outcomes for mothers and children, researchers have found.
Perhaps the clearest example is health insurance. Numerous studies have tied it to improved health and financial security for poor Americans. Since 2014, states have had the option to expand their Medicaid programs to cover nearly all poor adults, with the federal government paying 90 percent or more of the cost. But nine of the states planning to ban abortion have not expanded it, citing opposition to Obamacare, which Republicans have long vowed to repeal; a disinclination to offer health benefits to poor Americans who do not work; or concerns about the 10 percent of the bill left to state governments to finance.
“Closing the Medicaid gap is the first and best option for women’s health care,” said Allison Orris, a senior fellow focused on health policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Since 2021, states have also had the choice to expand Medicaid to cover women for a full year after a birth instead of two months. Just 16 states have declined to do so or opted for a shorter period — all but three of them are also banning or seeking to ban abortion.
Women who are poor and pregnant are eligible for Medicaid across the country, and the program pays for four in 10 births nationwide. But health experts say it also matters that women are covered for an extended period after birth, and for the years leading up to pregnancy. Conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disease and substance abuse can lead to pregnancy complications and poor infant health. Research suggests that Medicaid expansion can reduce maternal mortality. Medicaid also pays for contraception.
ImageThe case against Jackson Women’s Health Organization clinic in Jackson, Miss., wound up ending Roe v. Wade. Mississippi ranks last in the nation in infant mortality.
The case against Jackson Women’s Health Organization clinic in Jackson, Miss., wound up ending Roe v. Wade. Mississippi ranks last in the nation in infant mortality. Credit...Rogelio V. Solis/Associated Press
Paid family leave and subsidized child care are another example. None of the states that have banned abortion (or are likely to) guarantee parents paid leave from work to care for and bond with their newborns. Just 11 states and the District of Columbia do. Paid leave has been shown to benefit infants’ health and mothers’ physical and mental health as well as their economic prospects.
In most states, there is no guaranteed child care for children until they enter kindergarten at age 5. Subsidies available to low-income families cover a small segment of eligible children, ranging from less than 4 percent in Arkansas (which now bans abortion) to more than 17 percent in Vermont (which passed abortion rights legislation).
In many states, the subsidies also present a conundrum: Parents are required to work to get them, yet they can’t find or start work without child care. Some states add other obstacles. Mississippi requires single mothers to file for child support from fathers before they can receive subsidies. Also, a job paying minimum wage — which is not higher than the federal floor of $7.25 in 20 states — doesn’t necessarily pay enough to cover even subsidized care.
Support for families is different in some states once children are 3 or 4. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia offer or have committed to offering universal preschool. Unlike with other family benefits, anti-abortion states are roughly as likely as other states to offer public preschool. Six of those 13 states ban abortion or probably will.
“This is consistent with a view that education is a public responsibility,” said Steven Barnett, senior co-director of the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers, while other safety-net programs “fall outside the accepted sphere of public responsibility in the conservative states.”
Poorer states may have fewer resources to fund benefits like parental leave, or state supplements to the federal earned-income tax credit. But what they choose to do with federal grants can be revealing, said Zachary Parolin, a professor of social policy at Bocconi University in Milan who has studied how states use the broad discretion given to them by the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families welfare program.
“You can’t say Alabama gives very little cash assistance for low-income families with children because it can’t afford” the program, Mr. Parolin said. “It has a TANF program, and it’s primarily funded by the federal government.”
But in 2020, Alabama spent only about 8 percent of its welfare funds on direct cash assistance to families. Mississippi spent 5 percent. Instead, states often spend these grants on a wide range of other programs like pro-marriage advertising campaigns and abstinence-only sex education (in 2020, a state auditor in Mississippi found that the state misspent millions of federal welfare dollars, including on speeches that were never delivered by the former quarterback Brett Favre).
Mr. Parolin’s research has shown that states with larger Black population shares tend to spend the least on cash assistance, widening the poverty gap in America between Black and white children. The Times analysis similarly found that states likely to ban abortion devote a smaller share of welfare funds to basic assistance.
States with less generous safety-net programs also frequently use complex rules and paperwork to further limit access to benefits, said Sarah Bruch, a professor of social policy and sociology at the University of Delaware. States could help women and families, she said, not just by investing more in the safety net, but also by making it easier to find and use.
Angela Rachidi, a senior fellow studying poverty and safety-net programs at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, said the government has some role to play, but not alone: “We have a broader responsibility as a society — employers, churches, community organizations — to ensure moms feel they can bring those kids into the world.”
Evidence so far suggests that those organizations will struggle to meet the growing need.
After the Supreme Court decision, other governors banning abortion trumpeted their commitment to pregnant women and children. “Being pro-life entails more than being ‘pro-birth,’” wrote J. Kevin Stitt, the governor of Oklahoma, in an executive order signed July 11.
Oklahoma ranks among the bottom 10 states on measures of child poverty, infant mortality and the share of women of reproductive age without health insurance.
In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott said in a statement that the state has “prioritized supporting women’s health care and expectant mothers in need.”
He pointed to Texas’ decision to offer mothers six months of postpartum Medicaid coverage. But the state declined the full year of coverage offered by the federal government. Texas has also used techniques to purge children from Medicaid coverage for paperwork lapses. It has a higher rate of uninsured children and women of reproductive age than any other state.
In its legislation restricting abortion, Texas set aside $100 million over two years for a program that connects women with counseling, education and supplies, called Alternatives to Abortion. That funding pales in comparison with another benefit, which Texas has declined — the estimated $6 billion in federal funds each year that it’s losing by choosing not to expand Medicaid.
Linear Mode
