Ashlee Frandell, Shaika Islam, Tipeng Chen, Mattia Caldarulo, Timothy P Johnson, Lesley Michalegko, Yidan Zhang, Eric Welch
{"title":"Abortion Rights: Perspectives of Academic Scientists in the United States.","authors":"Ashlee Frandell, Shaika Islam, Tipeng Chen, Mattia Caldarulo, Timothy P Johnson, Lesley Michalegko, Yidan Zhang, Eric Welch","doi":"10.1089/whr.2024.0041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 2022, the US Supreme Court decision in <i>Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization</i> to overturn federal law safeguarding abortion rights led to considerable national debate on abortion and reproductive rights. We report the findings of a survey of academic scientists' perspectives regarding abortion rights, state policies, and the impact of the 2022 Supreme Court decision in <i>Dobbs v. Jackson</i>. Furthermore, we look at how academic scientists' institutions acted to address the <i>Dobbs</i> decision. Using a 2023 cross-sectional survey, we address the following research questions: (i) What are scientists' views of abortion rights? (ii) How have scientists responded to the 2022 Supreme Court decision in <i>Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization</i>? and (iii) How are their views different from that of the general public with regard to <i>Dobbs v. Jackson</i> and abortion rights in general? Findings show that abortion was a key factor influencing scientists' voting decisions. We also highlight substantial differences between scientists' perspectives and those of the general population and reveal gender differences of opinions within the scientific community. We conclude by presenting the actions implemented by universities and scholars in response to the <i>Dobbs</i> decision and discuss the implications our results have for both policy and practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":75329,"journal":{"name":"Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)","volume":"5 1","pages":"602-612"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11513566/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/whr.2024.0041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In 2022, the US Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization to overturn federal law safeguarding abortion rights led to considerable national debate on abortion and reproductive rights. We report the findings of a survey of academic scientists' perspectives regarding abortion rights, state policies, and the impact of the 2022 Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson. Furthermore, we look at how academic scientists' institutions acted to address the Dobbs decision. Using a 2023 cross-sectional survey, we address the following research questions: (i) What are scientists' views of abortion rights? (ii) How have scientists responded to the 2022 Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization? and (iii) How are their views different from that of the general public with regard to Dobbs v. Jackson and abortion rights in general? Findings show that abortion was a key factor influencing scientists' voting decisions. We also highlight substantial differences between scientists' perspectives and those of the general population and reveal gender differences of opinions within the scientific community. We conclude by presenting the actions implemented by universities and scholars in response to the Dobbs decision and discuss the implications our results have for both policy and practice.