Search

Importance: In 2022, the US Supreme Court abolished the federal right to abortion in the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision. In 13 states, abortions were immediately banned via previously passed legislation, known as trigger laws. Objective: To estimate changes in anxiety and depression symptoms following the Dobbs decision among people residing in states with trigger laws compared with those without them. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using the nationally representative repeated cross-sectional Household Pulse Survey (December 2021-January 2023), difference-in-differences models were estimated to examine the change in symptoms of depression and anxiety after Dobbs (either the June 24, 2022, Dobbs decision, or its May 2, 2022, leaked draft benchmarked to the baseline period, prior to May 2, 2022) by comparing the 13 trigger states with the 37 nontrigger states. Models were estimated for the full population (N = 718 753), and separately for 153 108 females and 102 581 males aged 18 through 45 years. Exposure: Residing in states with trigger laws following the Dobbs decision or its leaked draft. Main Outcomes and Measures: Anxiety and depression symptoms were measured via the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 ([PHQ-4]; range, 0-12; scores of more than 5 indicate elevated depression or anxiety symptoms; minimal important difference unknown). Results: The survey response rate was 6.04% overall, and 87% of respondents completed the PHQ-4. The population-weighted mean age was 48 years (SD, 17 years), and 51% were female. In trigger states, the mean PHQ-4 scores in the baseline period and after the Dobbs decision were 3.51 (95% CI, 3.44 to 3.59) and 3.81 (95% CI, 3.75 to 3.87), respectively, and in nontrigger states were 3.31 (95% CI, 3.27 to 3.34) and 3.49 (95% CI, 3.45 to 3.53), respectively. There was a significantly greater increase in the mean PHQ-4 score by 0.11 (95% CI, 0.06 to 0.16; P <.001) in trigger states vs nontrigger states. From baseline to after the draft was leaked, the change in PHQ-4 was not significantly different for those in trigger states vs nontrigger states (difference-in-differences estimate, 0.09; 95% CI, −0.03 to 0.21; P =.15). From baseline to after the Dobbs opinion, there was a significantly greater increase in mean PHQ-4 scores for those in trigger states vs nontrigger states among females aged 18 through 45 years (difference-in-differences estimate, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.37; P =.002). Among males aged 18 through 45 years, the difference-in-differences estimate was not statistically significant (0.14; 95% CI, −0.08 to 0.36; P =.23). Differences in estimates for males and females aged 18 through 45 were statistically significant (P =.02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of US survey data from December 2021 to January 2023, residence in states with abortion trigger laws compared with residence in states without such laws was associated with a small but significantly greater increase in anxiety and depression symptoms after the Dobbs decision. Key Points: Question: Were there differences in the changes in depression and anxiety symptoms after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade among residents of states with trigger abortion bans compared with residents of states without such bans? Findings: In this retrospective analysis of survey data from 718 753 participants, residents of states that had passed trigger abortion bans experienced a significantly greater worsening of anxiety and depression symptoms than residents of states without such bans after the Dobbs decision compared with a baseline period before its draft was leaked (mean Patient Health Questionnaire-4 score difference-in-difference estimate, 0.11 points). Meaning: Living in states with trigger abortion bans compared with living in states without such bans was associated with a small but significantly greater increase in anxiety and depression symptoms after the Dobbs abortion opinion. This retrospective analysis compares symptoms of depression and anxiety before and after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade between residents in states with abortion triggers vs those in states without trigger laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the case study of June Medical Services v. Russo,1 the U.S. Supreme Court considered two issues of substantial importance to people seeking abortions and the physicians who provide them. It mentions the Court rejected Louisiana's request to revisit long-established precedent and deny standing to the physicians who challenged the requirement.

Purpose Studies examining binge drinking disparities by sexual identity focus on intra- and interpersonal minority stressors experienced by lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) populations. Statelevel statutes are powerful tools that can reduce health disparities. We examined how state-level nondiscrimination statutes that include sexual orientation as a protected ground (i.e., inclusive statutes) are associated with binge drinking disparities between LGB and straight adults. Methods We combined data from the 2015-2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), the Movement Advancement Project (MAP), and administrative data sources for information on binge drinking, sexual identity, nondiscrimination statutes, and individual and state-level factors. We included an interaction term in the logistic regression models to test whether inclusive nondiscrimination statutes modify the association between sexual identity and binge drinking. Results Inclusive statutes modified the association between sexual identity and binge drinking among women, but not men. In states without inclusive statutes, the odds of binge drinking among lesbian [1.71 (95%CI: 1.27-2.31)] and bisexual [1.83 (95% CI: 1.54-2.17)] women were significantly higher compared with straight women. In states with inclusive statutes, the odds of binge drinking comparing lesbian and straight women were not significantly different [1.19 (95% CI: 0.92-1.53)]. The odds ratio for binge drinking comparing bisexual and straight women was 26.8% lower in states with [1.34 (95% CI: 1.13-1.60)] versus states without inclusive statutes. Conclusions The enactment of nondiscrimination statutes inclusive of sexual orientation at the state-level are associated with narrower binge drinking disparities between lesbian, bisexual, and straight women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]