Title: Restricting federal funds for abortion: another look.

POPLINE Document Number: 266710

Author(s):

Sommers PM
Thomas LS

Source citation:

Social Science Quarterly, 1983 Jun;6(2):340-6.

Abstract:

Explores the future economic costs of the decrease in the number of Medicaid-funded abortions among indigent women. The 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision gave the right of choice to all women in the U.S. regardless of their economic well-being. Federal funds allowed poor women to exercise their right to an abortion. However, in 1976, Congressman Hyde observed that the federal government was paying for about 30,000 abortions a year at a cost of U.S. $45 million. As a result, the Hyde Amendment was proposed, which forbade expending federal funds for abortion except where life of the mother is endangered. Debate surrounding the controversial amendment continued until June 30, 1980, when the Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of the Amendment. As a result, Federal funds were withdrawn for most abortions obtained by indigent women eligible for Medicaid. It would seem that the 99% reduction in the federal budget for Medicaid-funded abortions would show large savings to taxpayers. However, for indigent women who carry their pregnancies to term, Medicaid pays childbirth expenses and welfare pays childrearing expenses. Thus, the end to public funding of abortions for indigent women may cost taxpayers more money rather than saving them money. When the Hyde Amendment was put into effect, no attempt was made to measure the future public costs which would be incurred throughout the dependent years of the unwanted child. According to some studies, restriction on medicaid funding of abortions in 1978 probably compelled 14,000 to 30,000 women to have births they would otherwise have terminated by abortion. The children of these women will impose sizeable costs on society in the form of higher expenditures on health, education, and welfare. These added costs will eventually be passed on to taxpayers. Thus, no public funds are saved by forbidding abortions among indigent women.

Keywords:

Medical Assistance, Title 19
Financing, Government
Abortion
Abortion Law
Legislation
Funds
Low Income Population
Poverty
Cost Benefit Analysis
Women
Public Assistance
Changes
United States
Pregnancy, Unplanned
Pregnancy, Unwanted
Family Planning Programs
Child Care
Pregnancy
Unwanted Births
Financial Activities
Economic Factors
Fertility Control, Postconception
Family Planning
Social Class
Socioeconomic Status
Socioeconomic Factors
Quantitative Evaluation
Evaluation
Demographic Factors
Population
Social Change
North America
Americas
Developed Countries
Reproductive Behavior
Fertility
Population Dynamics
Programs
Organization and Administration
Child Rearing
Behavior
Reproduction
Fertility Measurements