A recent study from the University of California, Berkeley, has shed light on the situation regarding obstetricians and gynecologists in the wake of the 2022 Dobbs decision. Contrary to some expectations, the findings indicate that these specialists are not necessarily fleeing states with restricted access to abortion.
To dive deeper into these implications, Blaze News reached out to Dr. Christine Francis, a seasoned OB/GYN and the CEO of the American Society of Life and Obstetricians. She shared insights from the research published in JAMA, which surveyed over 60,000 OB/GYNs and concluded that abortion policies haven’t significantly changed where doctors choose to practice.
Interestingly, the study highlighted that, while a slight increase in the number of OB/GYNs in certain areas was noted, states with stricter abortion policies experienced an 8.3% rise, while states permitting abortion saw a mere 7.7% increase. Notably, areas labeled “threatening” to abortion rights observed an impressive 10.5% growth.
Authors Staiger and Borotnyy seemed taken aback by these outcomes. In their analysis, they pointed out that the overall trend in OB/GYN practice locations remained stable, regardless of differing state policies. This observation, however, stands in contrast to their earlier assumptions.
Dr. Francis complimented the researchers for publishing results that diverge from mainstream narratives while emphasizing that their findings align with what she and her colleagues have believed for some time: that restrictions on abortion aren’t likely to drive away the majority of OB/GYNs.
She noted that a significant majority—between 76% and 93%—of practicing OB/GYNs do not perform abortions, which suggests that, for most of these practitioners, such legal restrictions would not significantly impact their work. Francis also challenged narratives claiming that limiting abortion access would undermine women’s healthcare, asserting that the notion linking quality care to the availability of abortion is misleading.
While abortion restrictions remain a contentious topic, Francis argued that these laws don’t deter OB/GYNs from providing care where they are needed. In fact, she mentioned knowing several doctors who have left states like Indiana specifically to continue offering elective abortion services. Yet, she emphasized that this is not indicative of a widespread trend.
Ultimately, she feels that pro-life policies are not discouraging doctors from practicing in these states—and might even be improving access to care for women, as indicated by the rising number of practitioners. The overall message is that the intertwining of abortion with comprehensive reproductive care may not be as pivotal as some narratives suggest.
As Dr. Francis succinctly put it, “Induced abortion is not part of essential reproductive health care.” While the study may not shift abortion laws directly, it does challenge prevailing assumptions and contributes to the ongoing conversation about how policies affect healthcare practices.
