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 are the latest state-by-state abortion rates in 2023 and provisional 2024 data?
Executive Summary
The most recent analyses show national abortion totals and rates for 2024 that are broadly stable compared with 2023 but differ across reporting efforts: Guttmacher’s full-year analyses report roughly 1.04 million abortions in 2024 with a national rate around 15.4 per 1,000 women aged 15–44, while the #WeCount compilation reports a higher count near 1.14 million for 2024. State-by-state patterns reveal sharp local shifts — with some states recording large increases in care provided and others large declines tied to new bans and out‑of‑state travel [1] [2] [3].
1. Grabbing the Headlines: Conflicting but Consistent Big-Picture Claims
Analysts converge on one central claim: national abortion volumes were roughly stable from 2023 to 2024, but the magnitude depends on the dataset and methodology. Guttmacher’s summaries state a near‑1% increase in abortions provided in states without total bans and report roughly 1,038,000 to 1,048,700 abortions in 2024 depending on the version, with a 15.4 per 1,000 women rate cited in one summary [1] [3]. The #WeCount project, pooling facility counts and other reporting from April 2022–December 2024, estimates 1.14 million abortions in 2024, noting its count is an underrepresentation because some cases are imputed rather than directly reported [2]. These differences reflect methodological choices—scope (states with vs without total bans), inclusion of telehealth and mailing services, and imputation practices [1] [2].
2. National Totals and the Numbers That Matter to Policy Debates
Guttmacher’s recent releases present a narrative of overall stability with local volatility: their full‑year analysis cites a collective total for states without total bans near 1.04 million abortions in 2024 and a slight change in the national rate from 2023 [1] [3]. By contrast, the #WeCount compilation’s larger 1.14 million total for 2024 reflects broader facility reporting that includes telehealth trends and may capture events omitted by other sources; #WeCount also highlights growth in telehealth provision from 5% of abortions in 2022 to 25% by late 2024 [2]. Which number a reader uses matters: policymakers focusing on service provision within non‑ban states will look to Guttmacher; researchers seeking near‑real‑time facility counts and telehealth trends may prefer #WeCount’s approach [1] [2].
3. State-by-State Fireworks: Winners, Losers, and Cross‑State Flows
All sources point to marked state heterogeneity: sizable increases in care delivered in certain destination states and large declines where bans were enacted. Guttmacher identifies substantial rises in provider volume in Wisconsin (reported as very large percentage increases), Arizona, California, Kansas, Ohio, and Virginia, with declines in Florida and South Carolina linked to six‑week bans [1] [3]. Both Guttmacher and #WeCount document significant cross‑state travel; roughly 155,000 people crossed state lines for abortion care in 2024, representing about 15% of abortions provided in states without total bans, with Illinois, North Carolina, Kansas, and New Mexico cited as top destinations [1] [3]. These patterns reflect policy-driven displacement rather than uniform demographic shifts [1] [3].
4. Methodology Matters: Why Different Counts Diverge and What Is Missing
Discrepancies stem from differences in scope, reporting lags, and imputation. Guttmacher focuses on full‑year, institutionally modeled estimates for states without total bans and flags that totals exclude or separately treat jurisdictions with limited reporting [1] [3]. #WeCount compiles facility counts with partial imputation—estimating 83% direct reporting and 17% imputed—yielding a larger count that better captures telehealth and some rapid shifts but remains an undercount of total abortions [2]. The federal CDC surveillance system lags and is voluntary, with the most recent CDC reports historically trailing by years and varying in completeness across jurisdictions, limiting its utility for real‑time state comparisons [4] [5]. Users must compare methodologies before equating headline totals [2] [4].
5. Reading Between the Lines: Interpreting Numbers for Policy and Research
The available 2023 and provisional 2024 data paint a picture of national steadiness overlaying intense local disruption. Where bans or restrictions were imposed, in‑state provision fell sharply and out‑of‑state flows rose; where access remained, some states absorbed additional patients. Analysts and advocates will emphasize different datasets to advance policy narratives: Guttmacher’s modeled, peer‑reviewed approach supports assessments of access in non‑ban states, while #WeCount’s facility‑level compilation highlights service delivery shifts and telehealth expansion [1] [2]. Given reporting limitations noted by the CDC and others, the most reliable path for granular, current state‑by‑state figures is to consult the latest Guttmacher and #WeCount releases alongside state health department reports, and to treat single‑source headline totals as provisional until multi‑source convergence occurs [1] [2] [4].