Abortion policy, politics, and mental health: evidence from the Dobbs decision

After the US Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, abortion regulations are subject to state jurisdiction. Therefore, individuals in different states face very different levels of restrictions. We compare self-reported symptoms of anxiety and depression among individuals living in states with limited or no access to abortion care to individuals in states with relatively few or no restrictions before and after the Dobbs decision using high-frequency, nationally representative data from the Household Pulse Survey and Difference in Difference regressions. Estimates suggest that respondents in the restricted states are 7.4% more likely to experience moderate to severe anxiety compared to unrestricted states. We show that trends in anxiety were similar in restricted and unrestricted states before the Dobbs decision, suggesting that the estimates may have a causal interpretation. Robustness checks rule out alternative explanations, such as the ending of the Emergency Allotment of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.