IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v372y2025ics0277953625002990.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neonatal mortality and contraceptive utilization following abortion restriction in the Dominican Republic: A difference-in-differences analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Ishola, Foluso
  • McKinnon, Britt
  • Yang, Seungmi
  • Nandi, Arijit

Abstract

In 2009, the Dominican Republic's Constitutional Assembly banned abortion under all circumstances, including cases of rape and/or situations in which the mother's health is at risk. Abortion policies have the potential to influence access to reproductive and neonatal health services, health outcomes, and health equity. In this study, we utilized a difference-in-differences approach to evaluate the association between the 2009 abortion reform in the Dominican Republic and neonatal mortality and modern contraceptive utilization. We harmonized data from Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) between 1999 and 2019 to assemble a panel of 792,165 live births across 17 countries for analyses of neonatal mortality and 417,110 women ages 15–49 across 8 countries for analyses of modern contraceptive use. We compared outcome trajectories in the Dominican Republic to a group of control countries that did not change their abortion policies during the study period and are assumed to represent the counterfactual. Fixed effects for country and year were included to control for unobserved time-invariant confounders that varied across countries and temporal trends that were shared across countries, respectively. We also assessed for heterogeneity by household wealth, rural residency, and educational attainment through a stratified analysis. Over the study period, the rate of neonatal mortality was 27.0 per 1,000 live births and there were 39 per 100 women reporting use of modern contraceptives. Abortion restriction was associated with an additional 6.3 (95 % CI = 2.1, 10.5) neonatal deaths per 1,000 live births and a 9.6 (95 % CI = 4.2, 15.0) percentage-point decrease in modern contraceptive use. Estimates were robust to adjustment for individual, household, and country-level characteristics. However, there is possibility of residual confounding by unmeasured time-varying confounders, such as concomitant policy changes or interventions. Further research into how restrictive abortion policies compound racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic inequities is needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ishola, Foluso & McKinnon, Britt & Yang, Seungmi & Nandi, Arijit, 2025. "Neonatal mortality and contraceptive utilization following abortion restriction in the Dominican Republic: A difference-in-differences analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 372(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:372:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625002990
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.117969
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625002990
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.117969?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Levine, Phillip B & Staiger, Douglas, 2004. "Abortion Policy and Fertility Outcomes: The Eastern European Experience," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(1), pages 223-243, April.
    2. Grant Miller & Christine Valente, 2016. "Population Policy: Abortion and Modern Contraception Are Substitutes," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 53(4), pages 979-1009, August.
    3. Juan J. Fernández & Dácil Juif, 2023. "Does Abortion Liberalisation Accelerate Fertility Decline? A Worldwide Time-Series Analysis," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 39(1), pages 1-24, December.
    4. repec:plo:pone00:0168743 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Levine, Phillip B., 2003. "Parental involvement laws and fertility behavior," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 861-878, September.
    6. Grant Miller and Christine Valente, 2016. "Population Policy: Abortion and Modern Contraception are Substitutes - Working Paper 426," Working Papers 426, Center for Global Development.
    7. Fischer, Stefanie & Royer, Heather & White, Corey, 2018. "The impacts of reduced access to abortion and family planning services on abortions, births, and contraceptive purchases," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 43-68.
    8. Falk A C Voit & Eero Kajantie & Sakari Lemola & Katri Räikkönen & Dieter Wolke & Daniel D Schnitzlein, 2022. "Maternal mental health and adverse birth outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(8), pages 1-18, August.
    9. Sabia, Joseph J. & Anderson, D. Mark, 2016. "The effect of parental involvement laws on teen birth control use," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 55-62.
    10. Mohammad Hajizadeh & Son Nghiem, 2020. "Does unwanted pregnancy lead to adverse health and healthcare utilization for mother and child? Evidence from low- and middle-income countries," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 65(4), pages 457-468, May.
    11. Roman Pabayo & Amy Ehntholt & Daniel M. Cook & Megan Reynolds & Peter Muennig & Sze Y. Liu, 2020. "Laws Restricting Access to Abortion Services and Infant Mortality Risk in the United States," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-14, May.
    12. Clarke, Damian & Mühlrad, Hanna, 2021. "Abortion laws and women’s health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    13. Averett, S.L. & Rees, D.I. & Argys, L.M., 2002. "The impact of government policies and neighborhood characteristics on teenage sexual activity and contraceptive use," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 92(11), pages 1773-1778.
    14. José‐Ignacio Antón & Zuleika Ferre & Patricia Triunfo, 2018. "The impact of the legalisation of abortion on birth outcomes in Uruguay," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(7), pages 1103-1119, July.
    15. Agnès Guillaume & Clémentine Rossier, 2018. "L’avortement dans le monde. État des lieux des législations, mesures, tendances et conséquences," Population (french edition), Institut National d'Études Démographiques (INED), vol. 73(2), pages 225-322.
    16. Esha Chatterjee & Christie Sennott, 2020. "Fertility intentions and maternal health behaviour during and after pregnancy," Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 74(1), pages 55-74, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amanda J. Felkey & Kristina M. Lybecker, 2018. "Do Restrictions Beget Responsibility? The Case of U.S. Abortion Legislation," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 63(1), pages 59-70, March.
    2. Abdul Baki, Ghina & Beland, Louis-Philippe & Yazbeck, Myra & Zayat, Aline, 2025. "Reactance, rationalization, and women's rights for safe abortion: Evidence from Roe vs. Wade's overturn," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    3. Catia Nicodemo & Sonia Oreffice & Climent Quintana-Domeque, 2022. "Correlates of repeat abortions and their spacing: Evidence from registry data in Spain," Papers 2208.05567, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    4. Clarke, Damian, 2023. "The Economics of Abortion Policy," IZA Discussion Papers 16395, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Fischer, Stefanie & Royer, Heather & White, Corey, 2018. "The impacts of reduced access to abortion and family planning services on abortions, births, and contraceptive purchases," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 43-68.
    6. Lahey, Joanna N. & Wanamaker, Marianne H., 2025. "Effects of restrictive abortion legislation on cohort mortality evidence from 19th century law variation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    7. Forsstrom, Matthew P., 2021. "Abortion Costs and Single Parenthood: A Life-Cycle Model of Fertility and Partnership Behavior," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    8. Colman, Silvie & Dee, Thomas S. & Joyce, Ted, 2013. "Do parental involvement laws deter risky teen sex?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 873-880.
    9. Gábor Hajdu & Tamás Hajdu, 2021. "The long-term impact of restricted access to abortion on children’s socioeconomic outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-14, March.
    10. Gardner, Graham, 2024. "The maternal and infant health consequences of restricted access to abortion in the United States," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    11. Fischer, Stefanie & Royer, Heather & White, Corey, 2017. "The Impacts of Reduced Access to Abortion and Family Planning Services: Evidence from Texas," IZA Discussion Papers 10920, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Myers, Caitlin & Ladd, Daniel, 2020. "Did parental involvement laws grow teeth? The effects of state restrictions on minors’ access to abortion," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    13. Lena Janys & Bettina Siflinger, 2021. "Mental Health and Abortions among Young Women: Time-varying Unobserved Heterogeneity, Health Behaviors, and Risky Decisions," Papers 2103.12159, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    14. Clarke, Damian & Mühlrad, Hanna, 2021. "Abortion laws and women’s health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    15. Andrew Beauchamp, 2016. "Abortion Costs, Separation, and Non-marital Childbearing," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 182-196, June.
    16. Marshall Medoff, 2010. "The Impact of State Abortion Policies on Teen Pregnancy Rates," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 97(2), pages 177-189, June.
    17. Caitlin Knowles Myers, 2022. "Confidential and legal access to abortion and contraception in the USA, 1960–2020," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(4), pages 1385-1441, October.
    18. Bhalotra, Sonia R. & Clarke, Damian & Gomes, Joseph & Venkataramani, Atheendar, 2018. "Maternal Mortality and Women's Political Participation," IZA Discussion Papers 11590, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Lena Janys & Bettina Siflinger, 2021. "Mental Health and Abortions among Young Women: Time-Varying Unobserved Heterogeneity, Health Behaviors, and Risky Decisions," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 083, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    20. Sonia Bhalotra & Damian Clarke & Joseph Flavian Gomes & Atheendar Venkataramani, 2023. "Maternal Mortality and Women’s Political Power," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(5), pages 2172-2208.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:372:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625002990. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.