An important but controversial era in public policy ended with last week’s Supreme Court ruling allowing states to outlaw abortion. Philanthropy and nonprofits have played large roles on both sides of the fight over legalized abortion, and they will have even more to do as a new era unfolds.
Last week’s ruling centered on a Mississippi law — one of a growing number throughout the United States —that sought to limit the availability of abortions. Unless Congress can find a politically acceptable way to legalize abortion that would survive Supreme Court scrutiny, the ruling places the responsibility of setting policy for the procedure squarely on state governments. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 22 states already have laws on their books either banning abortion entirely or curtailing it; four more, it predicts, will move swiftly to enact new rules.
With polls showing a large portion of the population opposed to banning abortion (though divided over how to limit it), the months ahead will undoubtedly lead states to adopt a variety of policies. Some will make abortion readily available, and others will probably limit the option to exceptional circumstances, such as an imminent threat to the life of the mother, and perhaps not even that.
What is clear is that from now on, many women who want or need an abortion will face serious struggles. Where a woman lives will affect what services are available. She may need to have money for travel and lodging as well as for medical expenses. The decision to end pregnancy will not be solely the mother’s and father’s, but may require the involvement of others, such as parents, doctors, or social workers. Prosecutors may get involved as well, depending upon the laws states adopt. In those that have especially restrictive laws, the number of unlicensed (and potentially unsafe) providers may grow. Moreover, while any woman might face such challenges, the burden will fall most heavily on low-income and nonwhite ones.
That is where philanthropy can make a difference.
Both before and since Roe v. Wade, which made abortion legal nationwide, foundations and donors have given significant sums to organizations involved in the debate over abortion. They have backed advocacy groups favoring wider availability of abortion and opposing it. They have underwritten organizations that performed abortions and those that offered alternatives to it. They have provided support for women considering or who had abortions and for those who decided not to do so and faced difficulties with child-rearing. Even though Roe is no longer the law of the land, all these efforts — and more — will be necessary.
For starters, last week’s decision has not ended debate over abortion policy but simply begun a new chapter. Nonprofit advocacy and research groups on all sides of the issue will continue to need support, including for legal efforts to restore constitutional protection of abortion or safeguard other rights. Among them: protections that keep it legal to buy contraceptives, which some legal experts say are in jeopardy after the repeal of Roe. Moreover, rather than focusing on Washington, groups involved in the debate will have to expand their operations to state capitols. Some, such as Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, have already begun to add staff to enable them to do so.
Health and social-service nonprofits will also be facing new challenges. If they can continue at all, abortion providers, such as Planned Parenthood, will have to replace lost income, reconfigure their services, or relocate to places where they can continue to assist their clients. As state laws permit, approaches to counseling and family planning, such as telemedicine and prescriptions-by-mail, will need to be expanded and improved. To respond to the expected increase in children whose parents are unwilling or unable to care for them, adoption and child-care services (especially for newborns with disabilities) will need to grow. Organizations that favored replacing Roe often championed these kinds of alternatives, and now they will need to give more support to them.
Not least important is providing additional help for expectant mothers. Before Roe, religious organizations and other charities used to sponsor group homes to assist women with unplanned pregnancies to give birth. They were not always salubrious places to live, even for a few months, and in any case, such arrangements are not likely to be re-established on a large-enough scale. But just like traveling to another state for an abortion, childbearing also has costs that may be difficult for low-income parents to bear. In addition, a still-inconclusive body of research suggests that access to abortion has had a variety of socioeconomic effects, including reducing poverty among women. At a time when eligibility for government-funded welfare programs is stricter, philanthropic support for low-income women could become more vital.
The Supreme Court’s decision to reverse its 50-year-old stance on abortion has led to rejoicing among one part of the American public and rage among another. These feelings will not diminish any time soon and will undoubtedly lead to further changes in policy, if not at the federal level, then in the states. In the meantime, judging from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates, hundreds of thousands of women annually are likely to want help in dealing with an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy. Will donors and the organizations they support rise to the challenge and provide it?
