Examining public opinion on endorsed punishments for illegal abortion by abortion legality and abortion-restrictive states before Dobbs v. Jackson

Research Summary As a result of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, state lawmakers can and have enacted abortion restrictions, including criminal penalties targeting those who seek, provide, or assist with abortion. Given the current lega...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Mena-Meléndez, Lucrecia (Author) ; Jozkowski, Kristen N. (Author) ; Crawford, Brandon L. (Author) ; Turner, Ronna C. (Author) ; Lo, Wen-Juo (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2025
In: Criminology & public policy
Year: 2025, Volume: 24, Issue: 4, Pages: 557-599
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002c 4500
001 1942583087
003 DE-627
005 20251126113412.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 251126s2025 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1111/1745-9133.12702  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1942583087 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1942583087 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Mena-Meléndez, Lucrecia  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (orcid)0000-0003-1580-8697  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Examining public opinion on endorsed punishments for illegal abortion by abortion legality and abortion-restrictive states before Dobbs v. Jackson 
264 1 |c 2025 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Research Summary As a result of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, state lawmakers can and have enacted abortion restrictions, including criminal penalties targeting those who seek, provide, or assist with abortion. Given the current legal landscape, it is imperative to assess public opinion regarding the endorsement of punishments for illegal abortion. We conducted multivariate analyses to assess factors associated with punishment endorsements for an illegal abortion for the pregnant woman and healthcare provider. We also evaluated whether individual beliefs (i.e., abortion legality) and contextual factors (i.e., living in an abortion-restrictive state) may influence punishment endorsements. Using quota-based sampling with poststratification weights, we administered an online survey to English- and Spanish-speaking (n = 2224) U.S. adults before the Dobbs v. Jackson decision. Our findings suggest that punishment endorsements are shaped by individual and contextual factors. Living in an abortion-restrictive state and punishment endorsement were moderated by attitudes toward abortion legality in a few specific scenarios for the pregnant person. The probability of endorsing no punishment was significantly lower in abortion-restrictive states compared with non-abortion-restrictive states for those who believed abortion should be illegal in all (5.91% vs. 16.63%) and legal in all cases (27.85% vs. 41.89%). Additionally, for those who believed abortion should be illegal in all cases, the probability of endorsing fines was significantly higher in abortion-restrictive states (35.62%) compared with non-abortion-restrictive states (18.77%). Policy Implications Findings point to a disconnect between public opinion and punitive abortion policies. Post-Dobbs, as state legislators further restrict and criminalize abortion, our findings suggest that policies involving punishments beyond therapy or education, or some fines, lack broad public support. This misalignment—potentially rooted in elite influence and divergent moral frameworks—calls for abortion policy grounded in public health, democratic accountability, and moral pluralism. 
650 4 |a abortion attitudes 
650 4 |a abortion laws 
650 4 |a abortion-restrictive states 
650 4 |a illegal abortion 
650 4 |a Punishment 
700 1 |a Jozkowski, Kristen N.  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (orcid)0000-0003-3894-5395  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Crawford, Brandon L.  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (orcid)0000-0001-5509-5578  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Turner, Ronna C.  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (orcid)0000-0002-2984-7649  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Lo, Wen-Juo  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (orcid)0000-0001-5279-8163  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Criminology & public policy  |d Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 2001  |g 24(2025), 4, Seite 557-599  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)357169069  |w (DE-600)2094251-5  |w (DE-576)262493047  |x 1745-9133  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:24  |g year:2025  |g number:4  |g pages:557-599 
856 |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/1745-9133.12702  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [deprecated] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12702  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-9133.12702  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4814194943 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1942583087 
LOK |0 005 20251126113412 
LOK |0 008 251126||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a krzo 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a WA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw