Abortion banned, young Americans prefer to be sterilized

AGI – The decision of the United States Supreme Court in the Dobbs case, which on June 24, 2022 overturned the constitutional right to abortion, allowing states to further limit or ban abortionseems to have already generated the first effects on the contraceptive choices of US citizens, with a sharp increase in permanent contraceptive procedures among adults aged between 18 and 30. This was revealed by an international study, published in JAMA Health Forum.

The increase in procedures in women was double that in men. Early research documented an increase in demand for permanent contraception in the months following the ruling, including tubal sterilization and vasectomy. Until now, no research had assessed the ruling’s differential effect on permanent contraception among men versus women or among younger adults, who are more likely to have an abortion and experience sterilization.

To fill this gap, the researchers analyzed changes in tubal sterilization and vasectomy among young adults. Using continuously updated data from the platform, TriNetX, which comes from the medical records of academic medical centers and affiliated clinics, for the period before the sentence, between January 1, 2019 and May 31, 2022, and after, from June 1, 2022 to September 30, 2023, scientists calculated the monthly rates of permanent contraceptive procedures of 100,000 female and male people, of aged between 18 and 30.

Before the ruling, the rate of monthly permanent contraception increased by 2.84 and 1.03 procedures in those female and male, respectively. The ruling was associated with an immediate increase in procedures cpermanent contraception between women and men. The increase in procedures for female patients was double that of male patients.

“The models offer insights into the gender dynamics of permanent contraceptive use. And they may reflect the disproportionate health, social and economic consequences of forced pregnancy on women and on people capable of becoming pregnant,” the authors said. This study has several limitations, as the TriNetX platform does not capture state or healthcare,” the research team noted.

“We were therefore unable to assess potential state abortion outcomes,” the researchers admitted. “Furthermore,” the scientists added, “our findings provide no insight into the differential experiences of women of color, indigenous, Hispanic, disabled, immigrant, and low-income women, who disproportionately encounter interference and coercion in their contraception.” “The sharp increase in permanent contraception rates may indicate a policy-induced change in contraceptive practices,” the authors pointed out.

“The ruling may also have incentivized those who were already interested in permanent contraception to undergo the procedures,” the researchers hypothesized. “The decision-making process must be considered to understand the short- and long-term implications of the ruling on human reproductive autonomy,” the authors concluded.