CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4Reproductive Health and ContraceptionInternational Human Rights and Reproductive LawEthics and bioethics in healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Seeking Abortion Care Across State Lines After the Dobbs Decision

Open access
Cornell, Alia, Keefe-Oates, Brianna, Thornton, Olivia, Fortin, Jennifer, Gallegos, Andrea, Janiak, Elizabeth·2026·JAMA Network Open
DOI 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.1068PMC PMC12973109
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Importance: State-level abortion restrictions in the US enforced after the June 2022 Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court decision have worsened geographic, racial, and socioeconomic inequities in abortion access, warranting investigation of experiences for individuals who travel out of state to seek abortion care. Objectives: To highlight the obstacles abortion seekers must overcome to obtain care, to identify common barriers and facilitators of interstate abortion travel, and to offer recommendations for abortion organizations, policymakers, and advocates to expand access for individuals living in states with abortion bans. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study analyzed data obtained from out-of-state participants collected as part of a larger cross-sectional, mixed-methods study. All English- and Spanish-speaking patients from out of state who were at least 16 years of age and medically cleared for research attending 2 abortion clinics in Illinois between September and November 2023 were eligible. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participants completed a self-administered survey and a semistructured interview. Directed content analysis was used to identify emergent and crosscutting themes. Results: In total, 33 individuals (all self-identified as female or a woman) completed the survey and interview. Most participants were between 20 and 24 years of age (n = 12 [36%]) or 30 years or older (n = 12 [36%]), and from southern US states with a total abortion ban (n = 25 [76%]). From the time participants decided to terminate their pregnancy to the day of the abortion appointment, they experienced a median of 14.0 days of delay, with a mean (SD) of 29.6 (36.5) days of delay. Patient journeys of seeking abortion were categorized into 3 phases: information gathering, planning finances and travel, and traveling and completing the appointment. Participants reflected on how restrictive policies in their home states deepened abortion stigma and stifled access to accurate information. Most participants encountered their longest delays in the information-gathering phase, as they had to find legitimate clinics, often without any referrals, and navigate the complex web of laws between states. When patients had personal financial security, strong social support, or were in geographic proximity to a state in which abortion was legal, their journeys were facilitated. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional qualitative study of participants traveling across state lines for abortion, the policy landscape and abortion stigma of the home state, information and resource availability, and interpersonal support shaped their journeys in the post- Dobbs landscape. To improve cross-state abortion access for individuals in states with abortion restrictions or bans, policy change should be coupled with increased visibility of accurate information, charitable funding, and abortion stigma reduction. Abortion support organizations and the public should continue to enable access through social support services, such as volunteer drivers and abortion doulas.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.1068

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1. Map of State-Regulated Abortion Legality as of August 1, 2023 The legal landscape of abortion in the US near the time recruitment for this study began in September 2023. States with 2-letter postal codes are color-coded based on their abortion legality. The figure was created with MapChart.net, version 5.4.4.
Figure 1. Map of State-Regulated Abortion Legality as of August 1, 2023 The legal landscape of abortion in the US near the time recruitment for this study began in September 2023. States with 2-letter postal codes are color-coded based on their abortion legality. The figure was created with MapChart.net, version 5.4.4.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2. Flowcharts Depicting Participant Journeys in Searching, Planning, and Traveling Across State Lines for Abortion Care at 2 Clinics in Illinois, Fall 2023 Experiences of 4 participants are presented from the time they decided to have an abortion to the time they arrived at their appointment. Each diagram is presented in chronological order using arrows as guides. OBGYN indicates obstetrician and gynecologist.
Figure 2. Flowcharts Depicting Participant Journeys in Searching, Planning, and Traveling Across State Lines for Abortion Care at 2 Clinics in Illinois, Fall 2023 Experiences of 4 participants are presented from the time they decided to have an abortion to the time they arrived at their appointment. Each diagram is presented in chronological order using arrows as guides. OBGYN indicates obstetrician and gynecologist.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Ross, 2017, Reproductive Justice: An Introduction
  2. Foster, 2021, The Turnaway Study: Ten Years, a Thousand Women, and the Consequences of Having—or Being Denied—an Abortion
  3. Schoen, 2005, Choice and Coercion: Birth Control, Sterilization, and Abortion in Public Health and Welfare
  4. Solinger, 2005, Pregnancy and Power: A Short History of Reproductive Politics in America
  5. Cohen, 2021, Obstacle Course: The Everyday Struggle to Get an Abortion in the America
  6. Robinson, 2023, A Culturally Centered and Intersectional Approach to Reproductive Justice
  7. Brigance, 2022, Nowhere to Go: Maternity Care Deserts Across the U.S

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 4

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cornell, A., Keefe-Oates, B., Thornton, O., Fortin, J., Gallegos, A., & Janiak, E.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • The Roux Institute at Northeastern University, Portland, Maine
  • Planned Parenthood (US)
  • Alamo Women’s Clinic of Illinois, Carbondale
Corresponding author
Cornell, Alia
ORCID
Venue
JAMA Network Open
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2026-03-09
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
e261068
ISSN
2574-3805 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.1068
PMC
PMC12973109
OpenAlex
W7134256266
Cited by
4
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 4
FWCI
25.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JAMA Network Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Harvard University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Human Rights and Reproductive Law
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
abortion access, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, abortion restrictions, abortion stigma, travel delay, social support, financial barriers, abortion bans, abortion clinics, patient journey, racial and socioeconomic disparities
MeSH terms
Abortion Applicants, Abortion, Induced, Abortion, Legal, Adolescent, Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Illinois, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Pregnancy, United States, Supreme Court Decisions, Qualitative Research, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review