The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.
Comparison of Health, Development, Maternal Bonding, and Poverty Among Children Born After Denial of Abortion vs After Pregnancies Subsequent to an Abortion
Open accessAbstract
Importance: Evidence indicates that there are potential health, development, and maternal bonding consequences for children born from unwanted pregnancies. Objective: To examine the association of women receiving or being denied a wanted abortion with their children's health and well-being. Design, Setting, and Participants: A 5-year longitudinal observational study with a quasi-experimental design conducted between January 18, 2008, and January 25, 2016, examined women who received abortions just under the gestational age limit of 30 abortion facilities across the United States and women who were denied abortion just beyond the gestational age limit in these facilities. Analyses compared the children of 146 women who were denied an abortion (index children) with children born to 182 women who received an abortion and had a subsequent child within 5 years (subsequent children). Interview-to-interview retention averaged 94.5% (6895 of 7293) across the 11 semi-annual interviews. Exposures: Being born after denial of abortion vs after a new pregnancy subsequent to an abortion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Perinatal outcomes and child health, child development, maternal bonding, socioeconomics, and household structure. Results: This study included 328 women who had children during the study period (mean [SD] age at study recruitment, 23.7 [4.9] years). There were no differences by study group in consent to participate in the study, completion of first interview, or continuation in the study. Among the 328 children in the study (146 index children and 182 subsequent children), there were 163 girls and 165 boys. Perinatal and child health outcomes were not different between subsequent and index children, and there was no clear pattern of delayed child development. However, mixed-effects models adjusting for clustered recruitment and multiple observations per child revealed that poor maternal bonding was more common for index children compared with subsequent children (9% vs 3%; adjusted odds ratio, 5.14; 95% CI, 1.48-17.85). Index children lived in households with lower incomes relative to the federal poverty level than did subsequent children (101% vs 132% of federal poverty level; adjusted regression coefficient, -0.31; 95% CI, -0.52 to -0.10), and were more likely to live in households without enough money to pay for basic living expenses (72% vs 55%; adjusted odds ratio, 5.16; 95% CI, 2.34-11.40). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that access to abortion enables women to choose to have children at a time when they have more financial and emotional resources to devote to their children.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Third, we relied on a maternal-reported measure of bonding difficulties for which mean levels were relatively low (but similar to other studies; Foster et al. 2018; Kerstis et al. 2016) and that focuses on maternal perceptions rather than dyadic relationships.”
From Longitudinal associations between prenatal internalizing symptoms and mindfulness traits with postnatal bonding difficulties. (2025) · cites this paper as Foster et al. 2018
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
Gipson, J. D., Koenig, M., & Hindin, M. J. (2008) · Studies in Family Planning · doi:10.1111/j.1728-4465.2008.00148.x · Cited by 996
Self-citationThe Postpartum Bonding Questionnaire: a validation
Brockington, I. F., Fraser, C., & Wilson, D. (2006) · Archives of Women's Mental Health · doi:10.1007/s00737-006-0132-1 · Cited by 568
Reporting Participation in Epidemiologic Studies: A Survey of Practice
Morton, L. M., Cahill, J., & Hartge, P. (2006) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwj036 · Cited by 461
Women’s Mental Health and Well-being 5 Years After Receiving or Being Denied an Abortion
Biggs, M. A., Upadhyay, U. D., McCulloch, C. E., & Foster, D. G. (2016) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.3478 · Cited by 402
Self-citationConceptualisation, development, and evaluation of a measure of unplanned pregnancy
Barrett, G., Smith, S. C., & Wellings, K. (2004) · Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech.2003.014787 · Cited by 372
Abortion and mental health: Evaluating the evidence.
Major, B., Appelbaum, M. I., Beckman, L. J., Dutton, M. A., Russo, N. F., & West, C. M. (2009) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/a0017497 · Cited by 340
Kost, K., & Lindberg, L. (2015) · Demography · doi:10.1007/s13524-014-0359-9 · Cited by 322
Abortion and long-term mental health outcomes: a systematic review of the evidence
Charles, V. E., Polis, C. B., Sridhara, S. K., & Blum, R. W. (2008) · Contraception · doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2008.07.005 · Cited by 294
Trussell, J., Vaughan, B., & Stanford, J. B. (1999) · Family Planning Perspectives · doi:10.2307/2991573 · Cited by 273
Foster, D. G., Biggs, M. A., Ralph, L. J., Gerdts, C., Roberts, S. C. M., & Glymour, M. M. (2018) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2017.304247 · Cited by 266
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- US Department of Health and Human Services, 2012, Annual update of the HHS poverty guidelines., Fed Regist, 77, 4034
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Self-managed abortion: A systematic scoping review
Moseson, H., Herold, S., Filippa, S., Barr‐Walker, J., Baum, S. E., & Gerdts, C. (2019) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2019.08.002 · Cited by 173
“Despite conclusive evidence that induced abortion is 58 safe and effective(2), and is associated with a host of positive outcomes for the pregnant person(1) and their 59 families (3-8), many countries continue to restrict access to abortion.”
BackgroundEffects of Carrying an Unwanted Pregnancy to Term on Women's Existing Children
Foster, D. G., Raifman, S., Gipson, J. D., Rocca, C. H., & Biggs, M. A. (2018) · The Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.09.026 · Cited by 95
Self-citationPredicted changes in abortion access and incidence in a post-Roe world
Myers, C. K., Jones, R. K., & Upadhyay, U. D. (2019) · Contraception · doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2019.07.139 · Cited by 90
Beyond Abortion: The Consequences of Overturning Roe
Paltrow, L. M., Harris, L. H., & Marshall, M. F. (2022) · The American Journal of Bioethics · doi:10.1080/15265161.2022.2075965 · Cited by 78
“…seeking abortion care are already mothers; abortion denied negatively impacts the children a woman already has and is known to result in less bonding with the child resulting from the undesired pregnancy compared with a subsequent child born from a desired pregnancy (Foster et al. 2018b, 2019).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe Economic Consequences of Being Denied an Abortion
Miller, S., Wherry, L., & Foster, D. G. (2020) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w26662 · Cited by 74
“While 85 percent of those enrolled in the study completed the first survey, by the end of the 5-year study period only 58 percent responded (Foster et al., 2018).”
InfluentialSelf-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Foster, D. G., Biggs, M. A., Raifman, S., Gipson, J., Kimport, K., & Rocca, C. H.
- Affiliations
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- Foster, Diana Greene
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA Pediatrics
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2018-11-01
- Volume
- 172
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1053
- ISSN
- 1072-4710 (ISSN-L)
- 2168-6203
- PMC
- PMC6248140
- OpenAlex
- W2892333483
- Cited by
- 127
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 7.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
- Keywords
- unwanted pregnancy, maternal bonding, child development, child health, perinatal outcomes, household poverty, household composition, subsequent pregnancy, gestational age limits, abortion clinics, child well-being, maternal mental health, maternal anxiety, maternal stress, maternal substance use, maternal education, maternal income
- MeSH terms
- Abortion Applicants, Abortion, Induced, Adolescent, Adult, Child Development, Child Welfare, Family Planning Services, Female, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Mother-Child Relations, Object Attachment, Poverty, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Pregnancy, Unwanted, United States, 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