Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What is the breakdown of abortions by state in the USA in 2024?
Executive Summary
Guttmacher Institute’s full-year estimates place clinician‑provided abortions in states without total bans at roughly 1.04 million in 2024, with overall U.S. totals estimated above 1.1 million when including states with bans and other data sources; state-level counts vary sharply, driven by bans, travel and telehealth. Major data gaps—four large states not reporting to the CDC and undercounting of self‑managed abortions—mean any state-by-state breakdown is approximate and should be read alongside methodology caveats.
1. What the sources actually claim — the headline claims laid bare
The materials collectively advance several concrete claims: Guttmacher reports about 1,038,000 clinician‑provided abortions in states without total bans in 2024, a year‑over‑year increase of less than 1% and a substantial rise since 2020 [1] [2]. A separate Guttmacher update and media summaries put national totals above 1.1 million when accounting for broader measures [3] [4]. The CDC’s surveillance data remain the official reported counts for prior years (613,383 in 2022), but CDC reporting is incomplete because some states do not submit data [5] [6]. Travel across state lines—roughly 155,000 people in 2024—shifts where abortions are counted versus where residents live, amplifying state‑level variability [2] [4].
2. State-by-state picture — large contrasts and cross‑border flows
At the state level, patterns diverged sharply: protective states and those with preserved services saw increases in provision, while states with new bans or severe restrictions saw steep declines in in‑state provision, sometimes exceeding 50% drops year‑over‑year [6] [2]. The data show sizable out‑of‑state patient flows with Illinois, North Carolina, Kansas and New Mexico identified as major destinations for nonresidents, and travel accounting for roughly 15% of abortions provided in non‑ban states in 2024 [2] [4]. These flows mean that state counts reflect service location more than resident need—a clinic’s state count can surge even as neighboring state resident counts fall [6].
3. Why the totals differ — methods, missing states and definitions explained
Differences among sources arise from methodological scope: CDC surveillance compiles state‑submitted facility reports and lags by years, while Guttmacher combines facility data, surveys and private clinic reporting to estimate clinician‑provided abortions and attempts to model cross‑border care and telehealth [5] [1] [2]. Four large states do not report to CDC, creating undercounts in CDC totals, and neither CDC nor many facility reports capture self‑managed medication abortions obtained outside clinical settings, which Guttmacher and other researchers say lead to higher overall estimates [6] [1]. The net effect is that CDC yields conservative, official tabulations; Guttmacher yields more complete, modeled estimates [7] [1].
4. Telehealth and online clinics — a fast‑growing route reshaping state totals
Online‑only clinics and telehealth accounted for a substantial and growing share of clinician‑provided care in 2024, reported as 14–15% of abortions in states without total bans and rising sharply from 2023, with telehealth concentrated where in‑person access is constrained [1] [4]. Shield laws in some jurisdictions extend legal protections for clinicians offering telehealth across state lines, altering where services can be legally provided and complicating state breakdowns based on clinic location versus patient residence [8]. The growth of online provision means state service counts can understate resident demand and obfuscate where medications were actually sent or used, further complicating precise per‑state tallies [1].
5. Competing viewpoints and potential agendas — how interpretation matters
Advocacy and reporting around these numbers show distinct emphases: public‑health researchers and Guttmacher stress total access and model‑based estimates to capture hidden care, while some media citing CDC emphasize official, facility‑reported counts and year‑on‑year changes [2] [6]. Each framing serves policy aims—one highlights unmet need and the scale of travel and telehealth, the other highlights official trends and reporting gaps—so readers should note that differences reflect method and purpose more than factual contradiction [7] [2].
6. What’s missing and what to watch — data gaps that shape policy debates
Key omissions persist: self‑managed abortions, care provided outside licensed clinics, and nonreporting states mean any 2024 state breakdown remains an estimate rather than a full census [1] [6]. Future clarity depends on improved state reporting, routine inclusion of telehealth and medication‑only services in surveillance, and methodological transparency around cross‑state patient flows. Policymakers and researchers aiming to use 2024 state breakdowns should pair Guttmacher’s modeled estimates with CDC facility counts and explicitly account for travel and telehealth when drawing conclusions about local access and demand [1] [5] [4].