Societal preferences for access to abortion among Texas residents: Capturing tradeoffs using a discrete choice experiment
Awarded 2022
Capturing tradeoffs in abortion care
Sarah Munro, PhD, MA
University of British Columbia

The US Supreme Court decision for Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization has restricted abortion for people seeking to terminate pregnancy. People who experience structural oppression due to racism, classism, sexism, and other factors are most impacted by this decision and face burdensome pathways to acquiring an abortion. Access to abortion was severely restricted by state laws in Texas for years prior to the Dobbs decision, forcing residents to travel long distances to urban centres or out-of-state to access abortion facilities, to choose self-managed abortion options, or to not access an abortion at all. Understanding what matters most to people in Texas in choosing where to access an abortion can lead to identification of the appropriate, patient-centred supports to facilitate travel. In this study we will seek to investigate what matters most to people when making tradeoffs around abortion, with a focus on preferences of people experiencing structural oppression. Our overarching objective is to identify what matters most to residents of Texas when making a choice about travelling for abortion services. We will investigate how they prioritize and make tradeoffs between attributes relevant to travel for abortion care in a state where abortion is banned and where abortion is either banned or highly restricted in bordering states. We will also characterize preference heterogeneity by identifying preference subgroups and sociodemographic factors associated with group membership.