Attitudes and Laws About Abortion Are Linked to Extrinsic Mortality Risk: A Life-History Perspective on Variability in Reproductive Rights.

Abortion policy is conventionally viewed as a political matter with religious overtones. This article offers a different view. From the perspective of evolutionary biology, abortion at a young age can represent prioritization of long-term development over immediate reproduction, a pattern established in other animal species as resulting from stable ecologies with low mortality risk. We examine whether laws and moral beliefs about abortions are linked to local mortality rates. Data from 50 U.S. states, 202 world societies, 2,596 adult individuals in 363 U.S. counties, and 147,260 respondents across the globe suggest that lower levels of mortality risk are associated with more permissive laws and attitudes toward abortion. Those associations were observed when we controlled for religiosity, political ideology, wealth, education, and industrialization. Integrating evolutionary and cultural perspectives offers an explanation as to why moral beliefs and legal norms about reproduction may be sensitive to levels of ecological adversity.

Identifying Profiles of Support for Legal Abortion Services in Zambia: A Latent Class Analysis.

Relative to neighboring countries, Zambia has among the most progressive abortion policies, but numerous sociopolitical constraints inhibit knowledge of pregnancy termination rights and access to safe abortion services. Multistage cluster sampling was used to randomly select 1,486 women aged 15-44 years from households in three provinces. We used latent class analysis (LCA) to partition women into discrete groups based on patterns of endorsed support for legalized abortion on six socioeconomic and health conditions. Predictors of probabilistic membership in latent profiles of support for legal abortion services were identified through mixture modeling. A three-class solution of support patterns for legal abortion services emerged from LCA: (1) legal abortion opponents (∼58 percent) opposed legal abortion across scenarios; (2) legal abortion advocates (∼23 percent) universally endorsed legal protections for abortion care; and (3) conditional supporters of legal abortion (∼19 percent) only supported legal abortion in circumstances where the pregnancy threatened the fetus or mother. Advocates and Conditional supporters reported higher exposure to family planning messages compared to opponents. Relative to opponents, advocates were more educated, and Conditional supporters were wealthier. Findings reveal that attitudes towards abortion in Zambia are not monolithic, but women with access to financial/social assets exhibited more receptive attitudes towards legal abortion.

The importance of professional responsibility and fetal viability in the management of abortion.

In June 2022, the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision ended the constitutional right to the professional practice of abortion throughout the United States. The removal of the constitutional right to abortion has significantly altered the practice of obstetricians and gynecologists across the US. It potentially increases risks to pregnant patients, leads to profound changes in how physicians can provide care, especially in states with strict bans or gestational limits to abortion, and has introduced personal challenges, including moral distress and injury as well as legal risks for patients and clinicians alike. The professional responsibility model is based on the ethical concept of medicine as a profession and has been influential in shaping medical ethics in the field of obstetrics and gynecology. It provides the framework for the importance of ethical and professional conduct in obstetrics and gynecology. Viability marks a stage where the fetus is a patient with a claim to access to medical care. By allowing unrestricted abortions past this stage without adequate justifications, such as those concerning the life and health of the pregnant individual, or in instances of serious fetal anomalies, the states may not be upholding the equitable ethical consideration owed to the fetus as a patient. Using the professional responsibility model, we emphasize the need for nuanced, evidence-based policies that allow abortion management prior to viability without restrictions and allow abortion after viability to protect the pregnant patient's life and health, as well as permitting abortion for serious fetal anomalies.

A Risk Is Not a Harm: Abortion Exceptions in State Laws.

This letter responds to the article "Beneath the Sword of Damocles: Moral Obligations of Physicians in a Post-Dobbs Landscape," by Anne Drapkin Lyerly, Ruth R. Faden, and Michelle M. Mello, in the May-June 2024 issue of the Hastings Center Report.

Clinical and Advocacy Implications of the Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health Organization Ruling on Trafficked Persons.

The United States Supreme Court decision on the case of Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health Organization abolished federal protections of abortion, leaving abortion legislation at the discretion of individual states. Trafficked persons are a population especially vulnerable to the impacts of this ruling. Because there is no existing literature describing the effects of restrictive abortion legislation on this group, we described some of the potential consequences of restrictive abortion laws for sex and labor trafficked persons, based on real case examples. We describe steps that should be taken to sufficiently protect and support pregnant trafficked women in relation to the Dobbs law.