A liberal researcher’s latest study finds that women had more abortions during part of this year than the same period before the Dobbs decision, but a pro-life expert says the results bring him skepticism, as well as concern. The same report noted that blue states have effectively nationalized the purportedly “states’ rights” issue of abortion by sheltering those who illegally mailed hundreds of thousands of abortion-inducing bills to pro-life states. And the report documented that pro-life protections at the state level continued to save unborn babies’ lives.

The new report from the #WeCount project of the Society of Family Planning, released last week, found that the rate of abortions from January through March of this year reportedly exceeded a comparable period in 2022 under Roe v. Wade. The Dobbs decision, which ruled that the Supreme Court wrongly invented a constitutional “right” to abortion in the infamous 1973 opinion, allowed voters to enact pro-life protections, and more than a dozen states have laws in effect protecting most children from abortion. Yet “[f]or the first time since #WeCount began, the national monthly total number of abortions has exceeded 100,000,” in 2024, said the report. “We observed between 94,670 and 102,350 abortions per month, with a monthly average of 98,990.”

“This increase in the national totals appears to be driven by the increase in telehealth abortions,” says the report, when abortion chains such as Planned Parenthood distribute the abortion pill to mothers without an in-person visit. Abortionists use the same telehealth technology used by doctors in the healing arts to disperse the abortion-inducing pills mifepristone and misoprostol to women without checking for attendant health concerns, potentially placing women’s lives at risk.

“This is fatal for unborn children and terrible public health. If a woman has an ectopic pregnancy, an abortion can be fatal,” said Michael New, Ph.D, a professor of political science and social research at the Catholic University of America and a scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, on “Washington Watch” last Friday. Undetected anomalies can also complicate future pregnancies. Women who undergo chemical abortions report worse mental health outcomes, often citing the need to self-manage their abortions, including flushing their unborn child’s body down the toilet.

Despite the inherent health complications for women, the abortion pill presents great profits for the abortion industry. “[T]he national monthly number of telehealth abortions in January-March 2024 is 28% higher than the national monthly number of telehealth abortions in January-March 2023,” said the report. “Even excluding abortions provided under shield laws, we still observe more abortions per month in January-March 2024 (monthly average of 89,770 abortions) as compared to the same period January-March 2023 (monthly average of 86,967 abortions), a 3% increase.”

Yet the report appears to credit pro-life state laws with saving lives overall. It notes that the 14 strongest pro-life states — Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, and Wisconsin — “have experienced massive declines in the number of abortions.”

“We estimate that overall, if abortion had not been banned in these 14 states, approximately 208,040 abortions would have occurred in-person in these states in the 21 months since Dobbs,” said the report. “[O]ur data show that due to total abortion bans or 6-week bans, at least 208,000 fewer abortions were provided in-person.”

States with the greatest number of declines since Dobbs Texas (64,710), Georgia (39,245), Tennessee (24,775), Louisiana (16,175), and Alabama (13,335). The largest increases came in New York (1,357), California (957), Virginia (597), Kansas (503), and Pennsylvania (430).

The abortion industry and its political allies attempted to chip away at pro-life protections by mailing abortion pills to these states illegally — and six liberal states have passed statutes that the abortion industry refers to as “shield laws,” allowing abortionists to flout other states’ laws with impunity. “In January-March 2024, there was an average of over 6,700 monthly telehealth abortions provided under shield laws to people in states with total abortion bans or 6-week bans, and nearly 2,500 monthly telehealth abortions provided under shield laws to people in states with restrictions on telehealth abortion,” said the report.

That means abortionists carried out nearly 300,000 illegal remote abortions in states that protect mothers and their children from virtual abortion teleconferences.

The monthly increase of 6,700 virtual abortions, plus a monthly increase of 2,803 in-person abortions in other states, amounts to a total of 9,503 additional abortions a month. Yet the report found that the 14 most protective states prevented 9,907 abortions each month post-Dobbs.

If the report’s numbers are correct, state pro-life laws saved a net total of 404 babies a month, or 4,848 lives a year. There are reasons to question the numbers, said New. “There are three studies looking at Texas birth data, which show that the Texas Heartbeat Act has actually saved 1,000 babies every month,” he said, “Abortions are often hard to count because women go out of state, or they go to other countries, but babies are easy to count. And if more children are being born, that’s very powerful evidence that these pro-life laws are having an impact.”

While the allegedly rising abortion rate provides “reason to be concerned, I don’t think there’s reason for despair,” said New, who cited numerous “reasons to be a bit skeptical” about the report’s findings. “Prior to 2022, this organization had never done any U.S. abortion estimates,” he noted. The latest study’s numbers also conflict with results from the Guttmacher Institute, which was once formally affiliated with Planned Parenthood, and which has been conducting its studies much longer. “It’s only relatively recently that the Society for Family Planning has started counting telehealth abortions, so I think that’s inflating the numbers a little bit.” The SFP #WeCount report admitted, “With each report, we continue to refine our imputations and estimates for missing clinics or missing months of data. Thus, monthly totals in some states have been revised from our previous reports.”

The companies may have also provided inaccurate data. “Telehealth abortions are self-reported by companies that send abortion pills through the mail. These companies may have incentives to inflate their numbers. Furthermore, the fact that abortion pills were ordered does not necessarily mean that an abortion was obtained,” wrote New at National Review.

“Some women might have changed their mind,” he added, as the report would not cover the number of lives saved through the abortion pill reversal.

One of the study’s leaders, who has dedicated her research, in part, to advancing abortion pill dispersal nationwide, celebrated the results of the latest study, noting, “It eases the burden on clinics, so it creates more space for the people who are coming to” abortion businesses, said Dr. Ushma Upadhyay, one of the study’s co-leads. Upadhyay is a professor at the University of California-San Francisco and core faculty of Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH).

A 2021 article about Upadhyay stated she was “very excited” about the California Home Abortion by Telehealth (CHAT) study, “because it could have important implications on access to abortion.”

“People don’t know that medication abortion exists and that it can be done entirely at home safely without a clinic visit,” she pointed out. The article noted it “will also help expand the awareness about its existence and safety to people” who allegedly “need it.”

It also noted that Dr. Upadhyay deeply involved herself in social and racial justice issues within the institution. She’s a very active member of the UCGHI Black Lives Matter task force that focuses on both small and large activities at the institution through a racial equity lens.”

“It’s something that’s really needed,” Upadhyay said of the BLM/DEI movement.

Her dedication to helping the abortion industry, and pro-abortion politicians, send abortion-inducing drugs to states where they are banned shows “the other side does not view this as a state issue. They’re trying to nationalize the issue. Many politically liberal states are effectively exporting abortion,” explained New.

“The birth data do provide powerful evidence that our pro-life laws are saving lives and are building a culture of life,”

“After the Dobbs decision came down, there were many conservatives that had been saying that abortion is now solely a states’ issue. But the Left certainly doesn't think of it that way,” Jody Hice.

“The birth data do provide powerful evidence that our pro-life laws are saving lives and are building a culture of life,” said New.

“As the abortion pill becomes the primary means of abortion, and the federal government has greenlighted mailing them into EVERY state — abortion is an issue for Bible-believing, Christian voters,” said FRC Action Chairman Tony Perkins.