Restrictive State Abortion Bans — A Reproductive Injustice

This perspective article examines the implications of restrictive state abortion bans, particularly in light of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, which challenges the constitutional right to abortion established by Roe v. Wade. The authors argue that overturning Roe would exacerbate reproductive inequities, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, people of color, and those with limited financial resources. The article critiques Mississippi’s arguments in the case, highlighting the medical and socioeconomic risks of forced pregnancy. It emphasizes the importance of reproductive justice, which includes access to safe abortion, contraception, and comprehensive healthcare. The authors warn that banning abortion would increase maternal mortality and worsen health disparities, urging the medical community to advocate for equitable reproductive rights.

This perspective article examines the implications of restrictive state abortion bans, particularly in light of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, which challenges the constitutional right to abortion established by Roe v. Wade. The authors argue that overturning Roe would exacerbate reproductive inequities, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, people of color, and those with limited financial resources. The article critiques Mississippi’s arguments in the case, highlighting the medical and socioeconomic risks of forced pregnancy. It emphasizes the importance of reproductive justice, which includes access to safe abortion, contraception, and comprehensive healthcare. The authors warn that banning abortion would increase maternal mortality and worsen health disparities, urging the medical community to advocate for equitable reproductive rights.