Abortion Access

Reproductive health care, including abortion, is a vital component of women's health care. While women in the United States have had a constitutionally protected right to abortion since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, (1) actual access to abortion services is diminishing. (2) The Report Card examines five states policies which can have immense impact, both positive and negative, on women’s access to these services. States can affirmatively act to protect access in two ways. First, they can promote clinic access by banning violence, and by providing state police and prosecutorial authority in addition to that provided by federal authorities. Threats and violent attacks on reproductive health centers have had an extremely negative impact on women’s ability to obtain abortions. (3) In 1994, Congress passed the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), (4) and a decline in such incidents followed immediately. (5) Similar laws at the state level would provide further protection through state enforcement mechanisms. Second, states can use their own funds to provide abortions to their Medicaid beneficiaries, many of whom are denied coverage of abortions due to the Hyde Amendment. Enacted in 1977, this amendment is a federal law which prohibits the use of federal Medicaid funds to cover abortion except in cases where the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, or the life of the woman is endangered. (6) Using states' own funds to provide this access is critical for many low-income women.

On the other hand, states chip away at a woman's access to abortion when they enact policies to limit services. States can prohibit private insurers from covering abortions except in limited circumstances. (7) Second, states create a serious barrier through parental consent and notification policies. These laws require involving one or both parents in a minor’s decision to terminate a pregnancy and often serve to limit young women’s access to abortion. (8) Such requirements can endanger the health of young women—some may delay the procedure, and others may travel alone to another state to secure the abortion. (9) Finally, states limit access by requiring waiting periods, typically 24 hours, between the time a woman receives state-mandated counseling and the abortion. Waiting periods make it difficult to schedule appointments and cause delays, thereby increasing the risk of complications. They also force many women to incur greater financial costs or to face additional harassment at clinics and from abusive partners and spouses.

  • Clinic Access

      Strength Of Policy 2007 Change From 2004
    ALABAMA No/Harmful Policy Same
    ALASKA No/Harmful Policy Same
    ARIZONA No/Harmful Policy Same
    ARKANSAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    CALIFORNIA Limited Policy Same
    COLORADO Limited Policy Same
    CONNECTICUT No/Harmful Policy Same
    DELAWARE No/Harmful Policy Same
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Limited Policy Same
    FLORIDA No/Harmful Policy Same
    GEORGIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    HAWAII No/Harmful Policy Same
    IDAHO No/Harmful Policy Same
    ILLINOIS No/Harmful Policy Same
    INDIANA No/Harmful Policy Same
    IOWA No/Harmful Policy Same
    KANSAS Limited Policy Same
    KENTUCKY No/Harmful Policy Same
    LOUISIANA No/Harmful Policy Same
    MAINE Limited Policy Same
    MARYLAND Limited Policy Same
    MASSACHUSETTS Limited Policy Same
    MICHIGAN Limited Policy Same
    MINNESOTA Limited Policy Same
    MISSISSIPPI No/Harmful Policy Same
    MISSOURI No/Harmful Policy Same
    MONTANA Limited Policy Better
    NEBRASKA No/Harmful Policy Same
    NEVADA Limited Policy Same
    NEW HAMPSHIRE No/Harmful Policy Same
    NEW JERSEY No/Harmful Policy Same
    NEW MEXICO No/Harmful Policy Same
    NEW YORK Limited Policy Same
    NORTH CAROLINA Limited Policy Same
    NORTH DAKOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    OHIO No/Harmful Policy Same
    OKLAHOMA No/Harmful Policy Same
    OREGON Limited Policy Same
    PENNSYLVANIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    RHODE ISLAND No/Harmful Policy Same
    SOUTH CAROLINA No/Harmful Policy Same
    SOUTH DAKOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    TENNESSEE No/Harmful Policy Same
    TEXAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    UTAH No/Harmful Policy Same
    VERMONT No/Harmful Policy Same
    VIRGINIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    WASHINGTON (1) Meets Policy Same
    WEST VIRGINIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    WISCONSIN Limited Policy Same
    WYOMING No/Harmful Policy Same
     
    Meets PolicyMeets Policy 1  
    Limited PolicyLimited Policy 15  
    Weak PolicyWeak Policy 0  
    No/Harmful PolicyNo/Harmful Policy 35  
    Better Better 1  
    Worse Worse 0  
    Same Same 50  
    • 1. Washington is the only state to meet policy because its law, similar to FACE, protects both those seeking and providing reproductive health services from physical attacks and the threats thereof, requires unimpeded entrance to and exit from health care facilities, and protects facilities from property damage. In addition, the Washington law has criminal penalties, allows victims to go into court to stop any actions forbidden by the law, and allows victims to sue the violators for monetary damages and attorneys' fees. Revised Code of Washington, §§ 9A.50.005 to 9A.50.902.

    Has the state passed “clinic access” legislation to protect women and health care providers from violence and harassment at reproductive health centers?

    States receive a "meets policy" if they prohibit all threats to clinic access and a "limited policy" if they prohibit some threats to clinic access.  States receive a "no policy" if they have no protections to promote clinic access.

    Data Source: Clinic Access, 2007.

    Guttmacher Institute, State Policies in Brief, "Protecting Access to Clinics," May 2007, available at http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_PAC.pdf.

  • Private Insurance Coverage of Abortion1

      Strength Of Policy 2007 Change From 2004
    ALABAMA Meets Policy  
    ALASKA Meets Policy  
    ARIZONA Meets Policy  
    ARKANSAS Meets Policy  
    CALIFORNIA Meets Policy  
    COLORADO No/Harmful Policy  
    CONNECTICUT Meets Policy  
    DELAWARE Meets Policy  
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Meets Policy  
    FLORIDA Meets Policy  
    GEORGIA Meets Policy  
    HAWAII Meets Policy  
    IDAHO No/Harmful Policy  
    ILLINOIS No/Harmful Policy  
    INDIANA Meets Policy  
    IOWA Meets Policy  
    KANSAS Meets Policy  
    KENTUCKY No/Harmful Policy  
    LOUISIANA Meets Policy  
    MAINE Meets Policy  
    MARYLAND Meets Policy  
    MASSACHUSETTS Meets Policy  
    MICHIGAN Meets Policy  
    MINNESOTA Meets Policy  
    MISSISSIPPI No/Harmful Policy  
    MISSOURI No/Harmful Policy  
    MONTANA Meets Policy  
    NEBRASKA No/Harmful Policy  
    NEVADA Meets Policy  
    NEW HAMPSHIRE Meets Policy  
    NEW JERSEY Meets Policy  
    NEW MEXICO Meets Policy  
    NEW YORK Meets Policy  
    NORTH CAROLINA Meets Policy  
    NORTH DAKOTA No/Harmful Policy  
    OHIO No/Harmful Policy  
    OKLAHOMA Meets Policy  
    OREGON Meets Policy  
    PENNSYLVANIA No/Harmful Policy  
    RHODE ISLAND No/Harmful Policy  
    SOUTH CAROLINA Meets Policy  
    SOUTH DAKOTA Meets Policy  
    TENNESSEE Meets Policy  
    TEXAS Meets Policy  
    UTAH Meets Policy  
    VERMONT Meets Policy  
    VIRGINIA No/Harmful Policy  
    WASHINGTON Meets Policy  
    WEST VIRGINIA Meets Policy  
    WISCONSIN Meets Policy  
    WYOMING Meets Policy  
     
    Meets PolicyMeets Policy 39  
    Limited PolicyLimited Policy 0  
    Weak PolicyWeak Policy 0  
    No/Harmful PolicyNo/Harmful Policy 12  
    Better Better 0  
    Worse Worse 0  
    Same Same 0  
    • 1. This is a new indicator for the 2007 Report Card.

    Does the state restrict private insurers from covering abortion services?

    States receive a "meets policy" if they do not restrict insurance coverage of abortion services. States receive a "no policy" if they have any  coverage restrictions on abortion services.

    Data Source: Private Insurance Coverage of Abortion, 2007.

    Guttmacher Institute, State Policies in Brief,  "Restricting Insurance Coverage of Abortion," May 2007, available at http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RICA.pdf, accessed May 22, 2007.
     

  • Parental Consent/Notification

      Strength Of Policy 2007 Change From 2004
    ALABAMA No/Harmful Policy Same
    ALASKA Meets Policy Same
    ARIZONA No/Harmful Policy Same
    ARKANSAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    CALIFORNIA Meets Policy Same
    COLORADO No/Harmful Policy Same
    CONNECTICUT Meets Policy Same
    DELAWARE No/Harmful Policy Same
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Meets Policy Same
    FLORIDA No/Harmful Policy Worse
    GEORGIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    HAWAII Meets Policy Same
    IDAHO No/Harmful Policy Same
    ILLINOIS Meets Policy Same
    INDIANA No/Harmful Policy Same
    IOWA No/Harmful Policy Same
    KANSAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    KENTUCKY No/Harmful Policy Same
    LOUISIANA No/Harmful Policy Same
    MAINE Weak Policy Same
    MARYLAND Weak Policy Same
    MASSACHUSETTS No/Harmful Policy Same
    MICHIGAN No/Harmful Policy Same
    MINNESOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    MISSISSIPPI No/Harmful Policy Same
    MISSOURI No/Harmful Policy Same
    MONTANA Meets Policy Same
    NEBRASKA No/Harmful Policy Same
    NEVADA Meets Policy Same
    NEW HAMPSHIRE Meets Policy Better
    NEW JERSEY Meets Policy Same
    NEW MEXICO Meets Policy Same
    NEW YORK Meets Policy Same
    NORTH CAROLINA No/Harmful Policy Same
    NORTH DAKOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    OHIO No/Harmful Policy Same
    OKLAHOMA No/Harmful Policy Worse
    OREGON Meets Policy Same
    PENNSYLVANIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    RHODE ISLAND No/Harmful Policy Same
    SOUTH CAROLINA No/Harmful Policy Same
    SOUTH DAKOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    TENNESSEE No/Harmful Policy Same
    TEXAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    UTAH No/Harmful Policy Same
    VERMONT Meets Policy Same
    VIRGINIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    WASHINGTON Meets Policy Same
    WEST VIRGINIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    WISCONSIN No/Harmful Policy Same
    WYOMING No/Harmful Policy Same
     
    Meets PolicyMeets Policy 15  
    Limited PolicyLimited Policy 0  
    Weak PolicyWeak Policy 2  
    No/Harmful PolicyNo/Harmful Policy 34  
    Better Better 1  
    Worse Worse 2  
    Same Same 48  

    Does the state allow minors to obtain abortions without requiring parental consent or notification?

    States receive a "meets policy" if there is no enforceable parental involvement law.  States receive a "weak policy" if they have parental involvement laws, but allow health care providers to waive the requirement where appropriate.  States receive a "harmful policy" if they have parental consent and notification laws.

    Data Source: Parental Consent/Notification, 2007.

    NARAL Pro-Choice America, Who Decides? The Status of Women's Reproductive Rights in the United States, "Restrictions on Young Women's Access to Abortion," 2007, available at http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/choice-action-center/in_your_state/who-decides/maps-and-charts/map.jsp?mapID=12; Guttmacher Institute, State Policies in Brief, "Parental Involvement in Minors' Abortions," May 2007, available at http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_PIMA.pdf, accessed May 25, 2007.  States that have parental involvement laws that have been enjoined or not enforced receive a “meets policy.”

  • Waiting Periods

      Strength Of Policy 2007 Change From 2004
    ALABAMA No/Harmful Policy Same
    ALASKA Meets Policy Same
    ARIZONA Meets Policy Same
    ARKANSAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    CALIFORNIA Meets Policy Same
    COLORADO Meets Policy Same
    CONNECTICUT Meets Policy Same
    DELAWARE Meets Policy Same
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Meets Policy Same
    FLORIDA Meets Policy Same
    GEORGIA No/Harmful Policy Worse
    HAWAII Meets Policy Same
    IDAHO No/Harmful Policy Same
    ILLINOIS Meets Policy Same
    INDIANA No/Harmful Policy Same
    IOWA Meets Policy Same
    KANSAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    KENTUCKY No/Harmful Policy Same
    LOUISIANA No/Harmful Policy Same
    MAINE Meets Policy Same
    MARYLAND Meets Policy Same
    MASSACHUSETTS Meets Policy Same
    MICHIGAN No/Harmful Policy Same
    MINNESOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    MISSISSIPPI No/Harmful Policy Same
    MISSOURI No/Harmful Policy Worse
    MONTANA Meets Policy Same
    NEBRASKA No/Harmful Policy Same
    NEVADA Meets Policy Same
    NEW HAMPSHIRE Meets Policy Same
    NEW JERSEY Meets Policy Same
    NEW MEXICO Meets Policy Same
    NEW YORK Meets Policy Same
    NORTH CAROLINA Meets Policy Same
    NORTH DAKOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    OHIO No/Harmful Policy Same
    OKLAHOMA No/Harmful Policy Worse
    OREGON Meets Policy Same
    PENNSYLVANIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    RHODE ISLAND Meets Policy Same
    SOUTH CAROLINA No/Harmful Policy Same
    SOUTH DAKOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    TENNESSEE Meets Policy Same
    TEXAS No/Harmful Policy Worse
    UTAH No/Harmful Policy Same
    VERMONT Meets Policy Same
    VIRGINIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    WASHINGTON Meets Policy Same
    WEST VIRGINIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    WISCONSIN No/Harmful Policy Same
    WYOMING Meets Policy Same
     
    Meets PolicyMeets Policy 27  
    Limited PolicyLimited Policy 0  
    Weak PolicyWeak Policy 0  
    No/Harmful PolicyNo/Harmful Policy 24  
    Better Better 0  
    Worse Worse 4  
    Same Same 47  

    Does the state allow women to receive abortions without a mandatory waiting period?

    States receive a "meets policy" if they have no waiting period and a "harmful policy" if they impose one.
     

    Data Source: Waiting Periods, 2007.

    Guttmacher Institute, State Policies in Brief,  "Mandatory Counseling and Waiting Periods for Abortion," May 2007, available at http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_MWPA.pdf, accessed May 4, 2007.  States with waiting period laws that have been enjoined or not enforced receive a “meets policy.”

  • Public Funding

      Strength Of Policy 2007 Change From 2004
    ALABAMA No/Harmful Policy Same
    ALASKA Meets Policy Same
    ARIZONA Meets Policy Same
    ARKANSAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    CALIFORNIA Meets Policy Same
    COLORADO No/Harmful Policy Same
    CONNECTICUT Meets Policy Same
    DELAWARE No/Harmful Policy Same
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    FLORIDA No/Harmful Policy Same
    GEORGIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    HAWAII Meets Policy Same
    IDAHO No/Harmful Policy Same
    ILLINOIS Meets Policy Better
    INDIANA Limited Policy Worse
    IOWA Limited Policy Same
    KANSAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    KENTUCKY No/Harmful Policy Same
    LOUISIANA No/Harmful Policy Same
    MAINE No/Harmful Policy Same
    MARYLAND Meets Policy Same
    MASSACHUSETTS Meets Policy Same
    MICHIGAN No/Harmful Policy Same
    MINNESOTA Meets Policy Same
    MISSISSIPPI Limited Policy Same
    MISSOURI No/Harmful Policy Same
    MONTANA Meets Policy Same
    NEBRASKA No/Harmful Policy Same
    NEVADA No/Harmful Policy Same
    NEW HAMPSHIRE No/Harmful Policy Same
    NEW JERSEY Meets Policy Same
    NEW MEXICO Meets Policy Same
    NEW YORK Meets Policy Same
    NORTH CAROLINA No/Harmful Policy Same
    NORTH DAKOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    OHIO No/Harmful Policy Same
    OKLAHOMA No/Harmful Policy Same
    OREGON Meets Policy Same
    PENNSYLVANIA No/Harmful Policy Same
    RHODE ISLAND No/Harmful Policy Same
    SOUTH CAROLINA No/Harmful Policy Same
    SOUTH DAKOTA No/Harmful Policy Same
    TENNESSEE No/Harmful Policy Same
    TEXAS No/Harmful Policy Same
    UTAH Limited Policy Better
    VERMONT Meets Policy Same
    VIRGINIA Limited Policy Same
    WASHINGTON Meets Policy Same
    WEST VIRGINIA Meets Policy Same
    WISCONSIN Limited Policy Same
    WYOMING No/Harmful Policy Same
     
    Meets PolicyMeets Policy 17  
    Limited PolicyLimited Policy 6  
    Weak PolicyWeak Policy 0  
    No/Harmful PolicyNo/Harmful Policy 28  
    Better Better 2  
    Worse Worse 1  
    Same Same 48  

    Does the state provide funding for abortion as it does for other generally covered services?

    States can pay for abortion services for low-income women with their own funds.  States receive a "meets policy" if they provide funding for abortions for these women under all or most circumstances.  States receive a "limited policy" if the provision of state-funded abortion is contingent on certain health circumstances.  States receive a "no policy" if they only provide funding as mandated by federal law.

    Data Source: Public Funding for All Medically Necessary Abortions, 2007.

    Guttmacher Institute, State Policies in Brief, "State Funding of Abortion Under Medicaid," May 2007, available at http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SFAM.pdf, accessed May 4, 2007. The Report Card gives states credit for meeting the policy even if they have been required by federal or state courts to provide funding.

1. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

2. The Guttmacher Institute, "An Overview of Abortion in the United States," undated, available at http://www.guttmacher.org/media/presskits/2005/06/28/abortionoverview.html.

3. Due to the atmosphere of intimidation and violence at many clinics, there is an escalating shortage of physicians willing to provide abortion services. NARAL Pro-choice America, "Clinic Violence and Intimidation," January 22, 2007, available at http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/issues/abortion/access-to-abortion/clinic-violence/. For current statistics on clinic violence, see National Abortion Federation, "Violence and Disruption Statistics," available at http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/violence/violence_statistics.html.

4. 18 U.S.C. § 248.

5. National Abortion Federation, "Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act," available at http://www.prochoice.org/Violence/Security/FACE.htm.

6. 146 Cong. Rec. H12100, H12119, Conference Report on H.H. 4577, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 (H.R. 4577, Tit.V, §§ 508, 509) (December 15, 2000).

7. The Guttmacher Institute, "Restricting Insurance Coverage of Abortion," State Policies in Brief (May 1, 2007), available at http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RICA.pdf.

8. Some states also allow other adult relatives to give consent or receive notice. NARAL Pro-Choice America and NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, Who Decides? A State-By-State Review of Abortion and Reproductive Rights Executive Summary, 16th ed. (Washington: NARAL Pro-Choice America and NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, 2006), available at http://www.naral.org/choice-action-center/in_your_state/who-decides/introduction/.

9. NARAL Pro-Choice America and NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, "Restrictions on Young Women’s Access to Abortion," in Who Decides 16th ed., available at http://www.naral.org/choice-action-center/in_your_state/who-decides/key-issues/young-women.html.