Workforce & Economic Impacts
Where You Do Business Matters: Restricting access to comprehensive reproductive health care affects business efforts to recruit and retain talent, support employees’ access to healthcare, and ensure the well-being of your entire workforce.
The Business Case for Abortion Access
By a margin of 2:1, workers prefer to live in a state where abortion is accessible. This number is even higher for women, young adults, and college students.
76% of current and future doctors would not apply to work in states with abortion restrictions. This shift will impact workforce access to quality healthcare in general.
Nearly 1 in 5 patients must travel out of state for abortion care. Bans create costs and liabilities for employers that support their employees’ access to care.
The Problem
Abortion is now illegal in 13 states, with barriers to care in additional states.
As of 2023, almost half (26.1 million) of women of reproductive age were living in a state with a ban or severe restrictions to abortion access.
What Workers Want
Supermajorities of men and women in the U.S. support the right to abortion, regardless of political affiliation.
76% of adults under 30 and 61% of adults in their 30s and 40s believe abortion should be legal.
Workers would prefer to live in a state where abortion is accessible, and this is especially true for younger adults.
Driving away talent
Bans hurt a company’s talent pipeline in states
By a margin of 2:1, workers prefer to live in a state where abortion is legal and accessible.
Almost two-thirds of younger workers (age 18-29) would “probably not” or “definitely not” live in a state that bans abortion, and 45% are willing to turn down job offers in states where bans are in place.
As of January 2023, 10% of young women had already declined a job in a state where abortion is banned, and 44% had considered moving or were making plans to move.
Abortion bans can dry up future talent pipelines, too: 80% of current and prospective college students prefer to attend school in states with greater access to abortion, and 84% of students and 69% of parents do not want students to be without abortion access at college.
People want to work for companies that support abortion rights.
Companies that supported abortion access after Roe was overturned saw an 8% uptick in job applications.
76% of working women and 74% of working men under 40 say that they are more likely to work for a company that supports abortion access.
Senior employees are more likely to consider switching jobs to an employer that supports access to reproductive healthcare.
Worsening healthcare for the whole workforce
Bans and restrictions on access to reproductive healthcare have created significant healthcare and well-being risks for workers of reproductive age. They are also having the effect of worsening access to healthcare for the entire workforce in a given state.
76% of current and future doctors now say they would not apply to work or train in states with abortion restrictions.
Fewer new medical school graduates, across specialties, are applying to residency programs in states with abortion bans or restrictions. This reduced influx of doctors to anti-abortion states will impact access to and quality of healthcare for the entire workforce there.
68% of OB/GYNs say that abortion bans have worsened their ability to manage pregnancy-related emergencies, putting pregnant workers – and the pregnant family members of workers – in jeopardy. Women in states with abortion bans are nearly three times more likely to die during pregnancy, childbirth, or soon after giving birth.
States with abortion restrictions have a 16% increase in infant mortality rates.
Complicating business operations, costs, and liabilities
State abortion bans and restrictions are creating new costs, liabilities, and operational concerns for employers that want to support employees’ access to reproductive healthcare.
Nearly 1 in 5 patients now have to travel out of state for abortion care.
Some state lawmakers have criminalized travel and attempted to punish employers that help their workers access care.
State abortion bans are creating new costs for employers, as well as “murky” legal implications around coverage of workers’ travel costs to obtain an abortion.
Miscarriage care and abortion care rely on the same medicines and medical procedures, and there have been reports in numerous states of women suffering serious health complications because they were denied miscarriage care due to abortion bans.
Some pregnant workers worry about their safety when conducting business travel to a state that bans abortion, and might even forgo business travel for fear that they might experience a miscarriage and need care.
Anti-abortion activists often also support “fetal personhood” laws as part of restricting or banning reproductive healthcare, creating potential liability and costs for employers when their support of IVF for employees clashes with such laws.
In the year following the Dobbs decision, 26.1 million women of reproductive age were living in a state that eliminated or severely restricted abortion access – a form of healthcare that one in four women may need over the course of their careers.
Hidden Value:
The Business Case For Reproductive Health
The Business Case for Reproductive Health illuminates the link between access to comprehensive reproductive health care and business performance.