Bueno Xiana, Mena-Meléndez Lucrecia, Crawford Brandon L, Turner Ronna C, Lo Wen-Juo, Jozkowski Kristen N
Associate Research Scientist, Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Assistant Research Scientist, Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2025 Dec;33(1):2518669. doi: 10.1080/26410397.2025.2518669. Epub 2025 Jul 25.
Landmark legislative events can shift public opinion. We conducted a longitudinal survey examining abortion attitudes before and after which overturned in 2022. Wave 1 ( = 1,014) was conducted in June 2022, and Wave 2 ( = 792) in October-November 2022. Using bivariate analyses, we assessed people's attitudes towards the Dobbs decision and potential changes in abortion attitudes over time, across different abortion identity sub-groups (e.g. pro-life, pro-choice). Results indicate that people were informed about (90%) and disagreed (56%) with the decision, and did not report or experience a change in attitudes after the decision (68-73%). However, among those who did change, respondents were more inclined to endorse legal abortion after the decision (19-22%) than indicate abortion should not be legal (6-13%). Through analysing open-ended data, we found that participants more inclined to endorse legal abortion described the ruling as eroding personal rights, government intrusion, and threatening access to healthcare. Participants less inclined to endorse legal abortion indicated the ruling reinforced their belief in defending fetal rights. While not necessarily advocating outright illegality, such participants favoured stricter regulations. Notably, people who identified as "both/neither/prefer not to answer" tended to disagree with the Dobbs decision and lean towards greater endorsement of legal abortion. Uncertainty regarding (dis)agreement with the Dobbs decision was also higher among people who identified as pro-life and "both/neither/prefer not to answer" than among those who identified as pro-choice. These findings highlight important nuances that exist in abortion attitudes beyond the perceived dichotomy of the pro-life/pro-choice spectrum.
具有里程碑意义的立法事件可以改变公众舆论。我们进行了一项纵向调查，研究在2022年被推翻的之前和之后的堕胎态度。第一轮调查（n = 1014）于2022年6月进行，第二轮调查（n = 792）于2022年10月至11月进行。通过双变量分析，我们评估了人们对多布斯裁决的态度以及不同堕胎身份亚组（例如，生命权派、选择权派）随时间推移堕胎态度的潜在变化。结果表明，人们知晓该裁决（90%）且不同意该裁决（56%），并且在裁决后没有报告或经历态度变化（68 - 73%）。然而，在那些确实发生变化的人中，受访者在裁决后更倾向于支持合法堕胎（19 - 22%），而不是表明堕胎不应合法（6 - 13%）。通过分析开放式数据，我们发现更倾向于支持合法堕胎的参与者将该裁决描述为侵蚀个人权利、政府干预以及威胁医疗保健的可及性。不太倾向于支持合法堕胎的参与者表示该裁决强化了他们捍卫胎儿权利的信念。虽然不一定主张完全非法，但这类参与者赞成更严格的监管。值得注意的是，那些认同“两者皆是/两者皆非/不愿回答”的人往往不同意多布斯裁决，并更倾向于支持合法堕胎。在认同生命权派和“两者皆是/两者皆非/不愿回答”的人中，对多布斯裁决（不）同意的不确定性也高于认同选择权派的人。这些发现凸显了堕胎态度中存在的重要细微差别，这些差别超出了生命权派/选择权派这一明显二分法的范畴。
