Abortion Prohibition — Scioto Analysis

Question A: Prohibition of abortion in Ohio would reduce women's educational attainment in the state.

Question B: Prohibition of abortion in Ohio would reduce women's labor force participation in the state.

Question C: Prohibition of abortion in Ohio would reduce women's earnings in the state.

Question A: Prohibition of abortion in Ohio would reduce women's educational attainment in the state.

  
  
      Economist
      Institution
      Opinion
      Confidence
      Comment
    

  Jonathan Andreas
Bluffton University
Agree
6
Abortion prohibition would only have a very small effect on these averages because demand for legal abortion is quite inelastic and the majority of women will/would probably find substitutes that are either more expensive (legal abortion in neighboring states) or less safe (abortion pills delivered through the mail or worse). The availability of abortion pill technologies is a dramatic change from 1973 that will increase the prevalence of relatively inexpensive, illegal abortions if medically-supervised abortions are banned.  Also see subsequent comments. 
Bizuayehu Bedane
Marietta College
Uncertain
9
Kevin Egan
University of Toledo
Agree
8
Kenneth Fah
Ohio Dominican University
Agree
8
The cost of access increases as women seek alternatives in states that provide access.  The increased access would be more impactful for those who don't have the resources to seek alternatives, mostly those from low-income households.  Higher education is already a challenge, financially and socially.
Hasan Faruq
Xavier University
Agree
9
Bob Gitter
Ohio Wesleyan University
Agree
7
Given the fact that most women who have an abortion have completed their  schooling this effect would be small.
Nancy Haskell
University of Dayton
Strongly Agree
10
Faria Huq
Lake Erie College
Strongly Agree
10
Michael Jones
University of Cincinnati
Strongly Disagree
10
Fadhel Kaboub
Denison University
Strongly Agree
10
The empirical evidence is very clear about the negative impact of unplanned pregnancies on women's educational attainment, especially when support services are unavailable or unaffordable.
Charles Kroncke
Mount Saint Joseph University
Strongly Agree
10
Bethany Lemont
Ohio University
Strongly Agree
10
See this twitter thread for a summary of the economic evidence:
https://twitter.com/keds_economist/status/1524030047987851266

Time is a scarce resource.  When women have to spend time to take care of children, they have less time to spend pursuing an education.  
Trevon Logan
Ohio State University
Strongly Agree
10
Joe Nowakowski
Muskingum University
Strongly Agree
10
Curtis Reynolds
Kent State University
Strongly Agree
8
The research is strong about the importance of women being able to control fertility and their educational attainment and labor force participation.  
Lewis Sage
Baldwin Wallace University
Agree
9
Ejindu Ume
Miami University
Strongly Agree
9
Kathryn Wilson
Kent State University
Strongly Agree
9
Evidence suggests that high school graduation rates would be lower and college graduation rates would be lower.
Rachel Wilson
Wittenberg University
Strongly Agree
10

  
  

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	6	Abortion prohibition would only have a very small effect on these averages because demand for legal abortion is quite inelastic and the majority of women will/would probably find substitutes that are either more expensive (legal abortion in neighboring states) or less safe (abortion pills delivered through the mail or worse). The availability of abortion pill technologies is a dramatic change from 1973 that will increase the prevalence of relatively inexpensive, illegal abortions if medically-supervised abortions are banned. Also see subsequent comments.
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Uncertain	9
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Agree	8
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Agree	8	The cost of access increases as women seek alternatives in states that provide access. The increased access would be more impactful for those who don't have the resources to seek alternatives, mostly those from low-income households. Higher education is already a challenge, financially and socially.
Hasan Faruq	Xavier University	Agree	9
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Agree	7	Given the fact that most women who have an abortion have completed their schooling this effect would be small.
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Strongly Agree	10
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Strongly Agree	10
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Disagree	10
Fadhel Kaboub	Denison University	Strongly Agree	10	The empirical evidence is very clear about the negative impact of unplanned pregnancies on women's educational attainment, especially when support services are unavailable or unaffordable.
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Strongly Agree	10
Bethany Lemont	Ohio University	Strongly Agree	10	See this twitter thread for a summary of the economic evidence: https://twitter.com/keds_economist/status/1524030047987851266 Time is a scarce resource. When women have to spend time to take care of children, they have less time to spend pursuing an education.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Strongly Agree	10
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Strongly Agree	10
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Strongly Agree	8	The research is strong about the importance of women being able to control fertility and their educational attainment and labor force participation.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Agree	9
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Strongly Agree	9
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Strongly Agree	9	Evidence suggests that high school graduation rates would be lower and college graduation rates would be lower.
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Strongly Agree	10

Question B: Prohibition of abortion in Ohio would reduce women's labor force participation in the state.

  
  
      Economist
      Institution
      Opinion
      Confidence
      Comment
    

  Jonathan Andreas
Bluffton University
Agree
6
In addition to my comment on the first part of the abortion question, this kind of cost is irrelevant to the legalization debate.  The moral case AGAINST abortion is that it is murder and even very large educational or labor-force costs are worth it if abortion is murder.  The moral case FOR abortion is that it is killing flesh that isn't sentient (and/or religious people believe that it doesn't yet have a soul).  If so, then these kinds of costs to society are irrelevant to what people should be able to do with their own bodies.  
Bizuayehu Bedane
Marietta College
Uncertain
9
Kevin Egan
University of Toledo
Agree
8
Kenneth Fah
Ohio Dominican University
Agree
8
Hasan Faruq
Xavier University
Agree
9
Bob Gitter
Ohio Wesleyan University
Strongly Agree
10
A number of studies show that having a child reduces labor force participation.
Nancy Haskell
University of Dayton
Strongly Agree
10
Faria Huq
Lake Erie College
Strongly Agree
10
Michael Jones
University of Cincinnati
Strongly Disagree
10
Fadhel Kaboub
Denison University
Strongly Agree
10
The empirical evidence is very clear about the negative impact of unplanned pregnancies on women's labor forceparticipation, especially when support services like childcare are unavailable or unaffordable.
Charles Kroncke
Mount Saint Joseph University
Uncertain
8
Bethany Lemont
Ohio University
Strongly Agree
10
See this twitter thread for a summary of the economic evidence:
https://twitter.com/keds_economist/status/1524030047987851266

Time is a scarce resource.  When women have to spend time to take care of children, they have less time to spend working.  
Trevon Logan
Ohio State University
Strongly Agree
10
Joe Nowakowski
Muskingum University
Strongly Agree
10
Curtis Reynolds
Kent State University
Strongly Agree
8
The research is strong about the importance of women being able to control fertility and their educational attainment and labor force participation.
Lewis Sage
Baldwin Wallace University
Uncertain
10
single parenthood could - I suppose - increase labor-force participation if state income support rules be sufficiently draconian
Ejindu Ume
Miami University
Strongly Agree
9
Kathryn Wilson
Kent State University
Strongly Agree
9
Rachel Wilson
Wittenberg University
Strongly Agree
10

  
  

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	6	In addition to my comment on the first part of the abortion question, this kind of cost is irrelevant to the legalization debate. The moral case AGAINST abortion is that it is murder and even very large educational or labor-force costs are worth it if abortion is murder. The moral case FOR abortion is that it is killing flesh that isn't sentient (and/or religious people believe that it doesn't yet have a soul). If so, then these kinds of costs to society are irrelevant to what people should be able to do with their own bodies.
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Uncertain	9
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Agree	8
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Agree	8
Hasan Faruq	Xavier University	Agree	9
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Strongly Agree	10	A number of studies show that having a child reduces labor force participation.
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Strongly Agree	10
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Strongly Agree	10
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Disagree	10
Fadhel Kaboub	Denison University	Strongly Agree	10	The empirical evidence is very clear about the negative impact of unplanned pregnancies on women's labor forceparticipation, especially when support services like childcare are unavailable or unaffordable.
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Uncertain	8
Bethany Lemont	Ohio University	Strongly Agree	10	See this twitter thread for a summary of the economic evidence: https://twitter.com/keds_economist/status/1524030047987851266 Time is a scarce resource. When women have to spend time to take care of children, they have less time to spend working.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Strongly Agree	10
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Strongly Agree	10
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Strongly Agree	8	The research is strong about the importance of women being able to control fertility and their educational attainment and labor force participation.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Uncertain	10	single parenthood could - I suppose - increase labor-force participation if state income support rules be sufficiently draconian
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Strongly Agree	9
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Strongly Agree	9
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Strongly Agree	10

Question C: Prohibition of abortion in Ohio would reduce women's earnings in the state.a

  
  
      Economist
      Institution
      Opinion
      Confidence
      Comment
    

  Jonathan Andreas
Bluffton University
Agree
6
As mentioned in my first two comments about abortion, again, I don't think prohibition would have much effect on average earnings and I don't think anyone will change their mind about abortion based on these kinds of costs to society because the ethics hinge on whether it is more like murder or an appendectomy!  Another reason why abortion will have a small effect on average income and education statistics is that the women who are affected the most by prohibition are the poorest women who have the least opportunities.  Middle-class and wealthy women just pay more money and get out-of-state abortions or pay illegal providers in state. 
Bizuayehu Bedane
Marietta College
Uncertain
9
Kevin Egan
University of Toledo
Agree
8
Kenneth Fah
Ohio Dominican University
Agree
8
Hasan Faruq
Xavier University
Strongly Agree
9
Bob Gitter
Ohio Wesleyan University
Strongly Agree
10
Sadly, having a child reduces the earnings of a woman.  
Nancy Haskell
University of Dayton
Strongly Agree
10
Faria Huq
Lake Erie College
Agree
9
Michael Jones
University of Cincinnati
Strongly Disagree
10
Fadhel Kaboub
Denison University
Strongly Agree
10
The empirical evidence is very clear about the negative impact of unplanned pregnancy on women's educational attainment and participation in the labor force, both of which lead to employment options with lower wages, benefits and upward mobility. It's a poverty trap for women of color in particular. 
Charles Kroncke
Mount Saint Joseph University
Agree
7
Bethany Lemont
Ohio University
Strongly Agree
10
See this twitter thread for a summary of the economic evidence:
https://twitter.com/keds_economist/status/1524030047987851266

Time is a scarce resource.  When women have to spend time to take care of children, they have less time to spend working.  
Trevon Logan
Ohio State University
Strongly Agree
10
Joe Nowakowski
Muskingum University
Strongly Agree
10
Curtis Reynolds
Kent State University
Strongly Agree
7
Given a lack of universal access to low-cost/high-quality child care, young children make it difficult for caregivers to work full-time or they must make tradeoffs to accommodate childcare which can lead to lower earnings.
Lewis Sage
Baldwin Wallace University
Agree
9
Ejindu Ume
Miami University
Strongly Agree
9
Kathryn Wilson
Kent State University
Strongly Agree
9
Rachel Wilson
Wittenberg University
Strongly Agree
10

  
  