Report on U.S. Reproductive Rights and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

This report provides an analysis of recent legal and legislative developments concerning reproductive rights in the United States, with a specific focus on their alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 5 (Gender Equality), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Key Legal and Policy Developments

Federal Court Ruling on Planned Parenthood and Medicaid Funding

A recent federal court ruling has temporarily protected the provision of healthcare services, impacting progress toward key SDGs.

• On July 28, a federal judge ruled that Planned Parenthood health centers must continue to receive Medicaid reimbursements during ongoing litigation.
• The court indicated that a recently enacted bill aimed at defunding the organization is likely unconstitutional.
• SDG Impact: This development has significant implications for SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). By ensuring continued funding, the ruling supports the provision of essential health services to low-income populations who rely on Medicaid, thereby preventing a potential increase in health disparities.

Judicial Review of Tennessee’s Law on Aiding Minors

A Tennessee law criminalizing assistance to minors seeking out-of-state abortion care has faced a legal challenge, highlighting tensions between state law and fundamental rights central to the SDGs.

• A federal judge temporarily struck down a section of the “abortion trafficking” law that criminalized advising or encouraging a minor to seek an abortion, citing violations of the First Amendment.
• Provisions of the law that ban the transportation or sheltering of a minor for the purpose of an abortion remain in effect pending further hearings.
• SDG Impact: The case directly engages with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) by examining the constitutionality of laws that restrict free speech. It also affects SDG 5 (Gender Equality) by influencing minors’ ability to access information and services related to their reproductive health and bodily autonomy.

Implementation of Parental Consent Law in Nevada

The enforcement of a decades-old parental consent law in Nevada creates new barriers to healthcare access for minors, representing a setback for health and equality goals.

• A 40-year-old law requiring parental consent for a minor’s abortion is now in effect after a federal court lifted a long-standing injunction on July 22.
• A new lawsuit has been filed in state court, arguing the law is unconstitutional as it lacks exceptions for minors in abusive situations or foster care.
• SDG Impact: This policy directly challenges progress towards SDG 3 and SDG 5 by imposing significant barriers to essential healthcare for young people. The lack of exceptions for vulnerable youth raises concerns under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), as it could disproportionately harm those in precarious family situations.

State-Level Developments and their Impact on SDG Targets

Several states have seen legal actions that further define the landscape of reproductive healthcare access, with varying consequences for SDG attainment.

1. West Virginia: A federal appeals court upheld the state’s near-total abortion ban, ruling that FDA approval of the abortion pill mifepristone does not override a state’s ability to prohibit it. This decision curtails access to medical abortion, undermining SDG 3 by limiting options for safe and effective healthcare.
2. Ohio: A court has once again blocked a state law that would prevent nurse practitioners from providing abortions. The ruling cited a potential violation of the state’s 2023 constitutional amendment protecting reproductive rights. This legal battle is crucial for maintaining healthcare infrastructure in line with SDG 3 and upholding democratic legal processes relevant to SDG 16.
3. New York: An Ulster County clerk rejected an attempt by Texas to enforce a civil judgment against a New York-based doctor who prescribed abortion pills to a Texas patient. The clerk cited New York’s “shield laws,” demonstrating a state-level mechanism that supports SDG 16 by protecting providers who deliver care that is fundamental to achieving SDG 5.
4. Missouri: The state is suing Planned Parenthood over its claims regarding the safety of mifepristone. This legal action, which contradicts decades of scientific evidence on the drug’s safety, represents a challenge to evidence-based health policy, a core component of SDG 3.

Broader Implications for Health, Equality, and Justice

Impact of Abortion Bans on Maternal Health and SDG 3

Emerging research indicates that restrictions on abortion are directly linked to negative health outcomes, moving the U.S. further away from international health goals.

• A study in Texas found that women forced to continue pregnancies with fatal fetal diagnoses experienced health complications at a much higher rate (72%) than those who could access out-of-state abortion care (15%).
• This trend exacerbates the existing maternal health crisis in the U.S., which already has the highest maternal mortality rate among wealthy nations.
• SDG Impact: These findings show a critical regression from SDG 3, specifically Target 3.1, which aims to reduce the global maternal mortality ratio. The disproportionate impact on certain populations also widens health disparities, conflicting with the goals of SDG 10.

Data Privacy, Deceptive Practices, and Institutional Integrity

Investigations have revealed practices by anti-abortion pregnancy centers that threaten patient privacy and undermine trust in health information systems.

• An investigation found that these centers, which are not subject to HIPAA, collect sensitive patient data without requirements for its protection.
• These centers often use deceptive tactics to pose as clinical facilities to dissuade individuals from seeking abortions.
• SDG Impact: Such deceptive practices challenge the principles of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) by exploiting legal loopholes and eroding public trust. This directly compromises the ability of individuals, particularly women, to make informed decisions about their health, which is essential for both SDG 3 and SDG 5.

Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in thearticle?

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• The article extensively discusses reproductive health, which is a core component of SDG 3. It highlights issues like access to abortion care, the safety of abortion pills (mifepristone), and the impact of abortion bans on maternal health. For instance, it states, “Abortion bans are making pregnancy more dangerous in a country that is already experiencing a maternal health crisis,” and cites a Texas study linking forced pregnancies to higher health complications.

SDG 5: Gender Equality

• This goal is central to the article as it addresses women’s and girls’ autonomy over their bodies and lives. The legal battles over abortion access, parental consent laws for minors, and access to reproductive healthcare services are fundamentally issues of gender equality and reproductive rights. The article’s focus on “U.S. reproductive rights” and the various state laws impacting women’s access to care directly connect to ensuring women have control over their reproductive health.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The article is framed around legal and institutional challenges. It details numerous court cases, judicial rulings, and legislative actions. Examples include a federal judge blocking Medicaid cuts to Planned Parenthood, another judge striking down part of a Tennessee law, a court lifting an injunction in Nevada, and various lawsuits in West Virginia, Ohio, New York, and Missouri. These all relate to the rule of law, access to justice, and the functioning of legal institutions in protecting or restricting rights.

What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Target 3.1: By 2030, reduce the global maternal mortality ratio to less than 70 per 100,000 live births.

• The article directly addresses this target by highlighting the maternal health crisis in the U.S. It states, “The U.S. continues to have the highest maternal mortality rate among wealthy nations, and abortion restrictions are exacerbating these disparities.” It further supports this by citing a study where women denied abortions for pregnancies with fatal fetal diagnoses experienced significantly higher rates of health complications.

Target 3.7: By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programmes.

• The entire article revolves around the struggle for access to reproductive health-care services. It discusses barriers such as near-total abortion bans (West Virginia), laws requiring parental consent for minors (Nevada), attempts to defund healthcare providers like Planned Parenthood, and laws banning specific providers (nurse practitioners in Ohio) from performing abortions.

Target 5.6: Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences.

• This target is directly relevant as the article details the ongoing fight to secure reproductive rights in the U.S. The legal challenges, such as Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit against a law that “lacks exceptions for minors in abusive homes or foster care,” and New York’s “shield law” protecting providers, are efforts to ensure these rights are upheld against restrictive state actions.

Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

• The article illustrates the use of the justice system to challenge or defend laws affecting reproductive rights. The numerous court cases mentioned—from a federal judge ruling a bill “is likely unconstitutional” to the Ohio case that “will likely go up to the Ohio Supreme Court”—demonstrate the ongoing process of seeking access to justice and promoting the rule of law to settle these disputes.

Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.

• This target is addressed in two key ways. First, a judge struck down a section of a Tennessee law that prohibited “advising or encouraging minors to seek lawful abortion care,” ruling it “violates the First Amendment,” a fundamental freedom. Second, the article highlights an investigation into “deceptive” anti-abortion pregnancy centers that “pose as abortion clinics” and gather private data, which relates to the public’s right to access accurate information.

Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Maternal morbidity and mortality rates

• The article explicitly mentions that the “U.S. continues to have the highest maternal mortality rate among wealthy nations.” It also provides a specific statistic from a Texas study: “72% of women forced to continue carrying pregnancies with fatal fetal diagnoses experienced health complications, compared to 15% who were able to access abortion care out of state.” This percentage of health complications serves as a direct indicator for maternal morbidity.

Number and nature of laws and regulations on abortion access

• The article provides several examples that can be used as indicators. These include the existence of “near-total abortion ban” (West Virginia), the number of states with “parental consent or parental notification requirements for abortion” (mentioned as 36 states), and the presence of “shield laws” protecting providers (New York). Tracking the number and type of these laws indicates the level of access to reproductive healthcare.

Number of legal challenges and court rulings related to reproductive rights

• The article is filled with examples of legal actions. These include Planned Parenthood’s victory in its Medicaid defunding case, the blocking of Tennessee’s “abortion trafficking” law, the lifting of an injunction in Nevada, and lawsuits in West Virginia, Ohio, and Missouri. The frequency, nature, and outcomes of these court cases are indicators of the state of access to justice and the protection of reproductive rights.

Existence of deceptive practices and misinformation

• The mention of an investigation into “anti-abortion pregnancy centers” that “are gathering private health and religious data from patients” and “pose as abortion clinics” serves as an indicator. The prevalence of such centers and actions taken against them (like the call for the Texas Attorney General to investigate) can measure progress towards ensuring public access to accurate information.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

Source: reproductiverights.org