Distinguishing Between Enforceable and On-The-Books State-Level Abortion Policies Over Time: Findings From a Policy Surveillance Study

OBJECTIVES: To describe trends in state-level abortion policies before the Dobbs v Jackson Supreme Court decision, distinguishing laws that have been enacted through legislation/regulation and are thus "on-the-books" from laws that are enforceable, ie, "on-the-books" laws not blocked by court decisions or attorney general opinions. DESIGN: We used policy surveillance methods to build a database of enforceable and "on-the-books" state-level abortion policies from January 1, 2005, to June 1, 2022. We describe trends over time in enforceable policies and assess differences in enforceable and "on-the-books" policies within state-years. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: States in the United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Abortion policies enforceable or "on-the-books" at the state-level. RESULTS: There were multiple changes in enforceable policies within states over time, with the greatest number in requirements regarding private insurance coverage of abortion (28 states) and the fewest in Medicaid coverage of abortion (3 states). Changes were concentrated in the same subset of states (eg, 6 states had changes in 7 policies while 9 had changes in zero policies). We found more pronounced differences between enforceable and "on-the-books" policies for bans on abortion after specified gestations (30%), parental involvement requirements for minors (12%), abortion provider qualification requirements (9%), and mandatory waiting period requirements (8%) versus differences for hospital transfer agreement requirements (1%). CONCLUSIONS: Because of notable distinctions between enforceable and "on-the-books" abortion policies, researchers should be intentional and transparent about whether their policy exposure measures capture enforceable or "on-the-books" policies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Public Health Management and Practice
Published
2026-08-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/phh.0000000000002482
Primary Topic
Reproductive Health and Contraception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Distinguishing Between Enforceable and On-The-Books State-Level Abortion Policies Over Time: Findings From a Policy Surveillance Study

Lauren Ralph, Sarah C. M. Roberts, Adrienne R. Ghorashi, DeAnna Baumle
Journal of Public Health Management and Practice
Reproductive Health and Contraception
article

Distinguishing Between Enforceable and On-The-Books State-Level Abortion Policies Over Time: Findings From a Policy Surveillance Study

Lauren Ralph, Sarah C. M. Roberts, Adrienne R. Ghorashi, DeAnna Baumle
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To describe trends in state-level abortion policies before the Dobbs v Jackson Supreme Court decision, distinguishing laws that have been enacted through legislation/regulation and are thus "on-the-books" from laws that are enforceable, ie, "on-the-books" laws not blocked by court decisions or attorney general opinions. DESIGN: We used policy surveillance methods to build a database of enforceable and "on-the-books" state-level abortion policies from January 1, 2005, to June 1, 2022. We describe trends over time in enforceable policies and assess differences in enforceable and "on-the-books" policies within state-years. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: States in the United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Abortion policies enforceable or "on-the-books" at the state-level. RESULTS: There were multiple changes in enforceable policies within states over time, with the greatest number in requirements regarding private insurance coverage of abortion (28 states) and the fewest in Medicaid coverage of abortion (3 states). Changes were concentrated in the same subset of states (eg, 6 states had changes in 7 policies while 9 had changes in zero policies). We found more pronounced differences between enforceable and "on-the-books" policies for bans on abortion after specified gestations (30%), parental involvement requirements for minors (12%), abortion provider qualification requirements (9%), and mandatory waiting period requirements (8%) versus differences for hospital transfer agreement requirements (1%). CONCLUSIONS: Because of notable distinctions between enforceable and "on-the-books" abortion policies, researchers should be intentional and transparent about whether their policy exposure measures capture enforceable or "on-the-books" policies.

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice
Temple University (US)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Reproductive Health and Contraception
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Distinguishing Between Enforceable and On-The-Books State-Level Abortion Policies Over Time: Findings From a Policy Surveillance Study — Lauren Ralph, Sarah C. M. Roberts, et al. · Journal of Public Health Management and Practice (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS