Abortion bans don’t reduce abortions. So why did Idaho lawmakers pass one?
Idaho lawmakers recently passed legislation modeled after Texas’ highly controversial abortion law, banning the practice after six weeks of pregnancy — before many women are aware they are pregnant. Under Senate Bill 1309, (dubbed the “Fetal Heartbeat, Preborn Child Protection Act”) no one can provide an abortion to a pregnant woman when a fetal heartbeat has been detected, except in the case of a medical emergency, rape or incest. The law also allows family members to sue any doctor who provides an abortion during a pregnancy longer than six weeks. The bill’s sponsors and supporters have explicitly stated their desire for Idaho to become the next Texas.
Despite their intention, abortion bans do not reduce abortions. Put another way, these bans do not save the lives they purport to save. Overwhelming global and domestic data strongly supports the fact that if abortion is banned in one place, women obtain the procedure in another location or order abortion pills online.
After the aforementioned Texas ban took effect last fall, Texan abortion seekers flooded out of state clinics. Clinics in five neighboring states saw a nearly 800% increase in patients from Texas. At a Planned Parenthood clinic in Oklahoma City, at one point more than 60% of the 219 appointments over the following two weeks were for women from Texas. In sum, abortion bans do nothing to change women’s need for abortion care, but merely shift where and how women obtain abortions.
If abortion bans don’t reduce the rate of abortion, then why have these bans at all?
I suspect that the proposed ban wasn’t actually developed with concern for protecting “Preborn” children. If Idaho lawmakers were actually concerned with protecting children, they wouldn’t have rejected a $6 million federal grant aimed at improving access to early education and child care just last year. They also would not have voted down a $200 million Idaho Department of Health and Welfare budget bill that provided nearly $34 million in federal COVID relief money for child care funding.
Clearly, the ban is not about children’s welfare — the evidence points far too strongly in the opposite direction. Rather, this bill is indicative of a dangerous trend of conservative lawmakers in this country who, under the veil of religion or “family values,” believe it is their right, nay, duty, to police and survey the bodies of American women.
The First Amendment provides the right to practice religion freely and I fully acknowledge that people are free to believe, for religious reasons or otherwise, that life begins at conception. Philosophers and theologians have argued for centuries about when personhood begins, and modern science has only exacerbated the debate. But, the basic fact is this — the question of whether a fetus is a person is up for debate. The question of whether a woman is a person is not. Female personhood, not fetal personhood, must be the basis of abortion law.
Conservative lawmakers have attempted to portray women seeking abortion as reckless, thoughtless, and promiscuous, but data reveals most women seeking abortion are already mothers (59%) and are looking to end their pregnancy because they cannot afford to support another child, they are experiencing depression, or they are in an abusive or contentious relationship with their male partner. The women seeking abortion in this state are your teachers, your police officers, your coaches, your sisters, daughters, nieces, and aunts. You pass them biking on the trail, they hand you your coffee, you sit next to them in the office. They are cherished, celebrated, and valued people of your community.