Are pro-life laws fueling gaps in medical care? Data reveals claim is unjustified.

(Pregnancy Help News) Since the Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade just over two years ago, 24 U.S. states have enacted pro-life laws or have introduced laws that are held up in litigation. Some on the pro-abortion side have asserted that a correlation exists between pro-life laws and hospital closures and also that the laws prompt future doctors to choose not to train in those states.

Dr. Ingrid Skop, vice president and director of Medical Affairs for Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI), and Tessa Cox, CLI’s senior research associate, gathered data to examine this claim more closely in the research article, “Will Pro-Life Laws Drive Away Doctors and Lead to Hospital Closures?”

CLI is the research arm for national pro-life group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America and performs scientific, statistical, and medical studies.

A closer look at a possible connection between pro-life laws and hospital closures revealed some key findings:

• Pro-life states’ efforts to protect life have been encountered pushback, including inaccurate claims that the laws are leading to the hospital closures.
• The statistics show these claims are unjustified.
• Medical school enrollment has actually increased nationwide over the last five years.
• Pro-life states are receiving more applications for medical school than they have spots available, and
• Hospitals are shutting down due to other factors including financial problems and declining patient volumes.

The research was prompted by widespread claims against pro-life states such as that the laws are “contributing to hospital closures and driving doctors away.”

Others, such as Pro-Abortion Commonwealth Fund, have implied that pro-life laws will directly worsen outcomes and “drive more maternal and reproductive health care providers to shut down or leave states, deepening the crisis of access to maternity care.”

After a deeper examination of the data and national trends, Skop and Cox concluded these claims are unjustified, as they cite, “Data from the American Council for Graduate Medical Education shows that of the 25 obstetrics and gynecology programs newly accredited in the past five years, over half (56%) are located in pro-life states.”

As the alleged correlation of hospital closures and pro-life laws was investigated, Skop and Cox report the closure of hospitals was a problem well before the Dobbs decision and is a result of other factors.

A hospital in Idaho recently closed its labor and delivery unit only to report a main factor that led to the closure included lack of demand for hospital services and this becoming a common obstacle for rural hospitals.

Rural areas nationwide are reportedly being referred to as “maternity care deserts” and it is a problem that needs attention. Skop and Cox point out the Idaho hospital closure of the labor and delivery unit was primarily due to a lack of births. The researchers go on to share this factor could be expected to be resolved with pro-life laws in place.

Skop and Cox conclude with urging pro-life states not to be afraid of losing medical care, but instead to continue to work to attract obstetricians to their area who feel called to care equally for both mom and the baby.

PHN Editor’s Note: Heartbeat International manages Pregnancy Help News.

LAN Editor’s Note: This article was originally published at Pregnancy Help News and is reprinted here with permission.

Call on President Trump to pardon the FACE Act prisoners on his first day in office.