Hi Jason, I’m the author of the aforementioned research into IUDs, artificial wombs, and legislative solutions, which is indeed very cursory. The research is included at the bottom of a [larger draft](https://docs.google.com/document/d/10VL9m-GW2f428WZSEs834kiDrHFxtfPNQzc6ljLwTyc/edit?usp=sharing) of an eventual EA forum post outlining reasons why EAs might oppose abortion and potential interventions in that regard.
The draft’s philosophical arguments against abortion are much more mature than its section on potential interventions, partially because I’ve thought far more about the philosophical component than the practical component, and partially because I’ve been extremely time-poor since the time I dumped my thoughts into that draft.
I’d be more than happy to hear your thoughts / collaborate on a post on interventions to reduce the rate of abortion. Separating the philosophical post (“why might reducing the abortion rate be an EA priority?”) from the practical post (“how could we effectively reduce the abortion rate?”) might be an even better way to go. I’m sure commenters would have much to say on both topics :)
If there were cost-efficient leverage points, it might be worth investing some amount of money and effort in.
A non-exhaustive list of semi-conjoint reasons:
One believes abortion is a grave moral wrong and a lot occur each year.
One doesn’t believe abortion is a grave moral wrong, but assigns some weight to the view’s correctness. Even assigning a 10% chance to the view’s correctness still means a lot is potentially at stake.
There might be relatively easy ways to make a difference and have other positive, follow-on effects. For example, male contraceptives might make a big difference in reducing unintended pregnancies and my understanding (a few years old) is that there aren’t many funders of relevant research. (I recognize that some people argue that the follow-on effects of other contraceptives like the pill are not fully positive and some believe they may even be negative.)
Abortion is ridiculously polarizing and seems to crowd out discussion of other important issues in politics. Maybe reducing its salience would help increase the ability to focus on other issues?
Obtaining an abortion imposes greater and greater costs in the US (financially, in time required, psychologically, health risks) as restrictions are rolled out.
The strategies engaged in by many pro-life advocates seem unlikely to significantly reduce abortion rates.
There has been some very cursory research into things like IUDs, artificial wombs, legislative action etc., but I don’t think the author ever finished or published it.
Has anyone associated with EA ever looked for leverage points for reducing the rate of abortion?
(I believe the answer is no, or at least it hasn’t been published publicly.)
Hi Jason, I’m the author of the aforementioned research into IUDs, artificial wombs, and legislative solutions, which is indeed very cursory. The research is included at the bottom of a [larger draft](https://docs.google.com/document/d/10VL9m-GW2f428WZSEs834kiDrHFxtfPNQzc6ljLwTyc/edit?usp=sharing) of an eventual EA forum post outlining reasons why EAs might oppose abortion and potential interventions in that regard.
The draft’s philosophical arguments against abortion are much more mature than its section on potential interventions, partially because I’ve thought far more about the philosophical component than the practical component, and partially because I’ve been extremely time-poor since the time I dumped my thoughts into that draft.
I’d be more than happy to hear your thoughts / collaborate on a post on interventions to reduce the rate of abortion. Separating the philosophical post (“why might reducing the abortion rate be an EA priority?”) from the practical post (“how could we effectively reduce the abortion rate?”) might be an even better way to go. I’m sure commenters would have much to say on both topics :)
I sense the answer is yes. I seem to recall that someone looked into this.
Also I guess the answer is technically yes since I wouldn’t be surprised if some interventions already lower the rate of unwanted pregnancy.
Hi—I’m just curious what the rationale for this would be?
If there were cost-efficient leverage points, it might be worth investing some amount of money and effort in.
A non-exhaustive list of semi-conjoint reasons:
One believes abortion is a grave moral wrong and a lot occur each year.
One doesn’t believe abortion is a grave moral wrong, but assigns some weight to the view’s correctness. Even assigning a 10% chance to the view’s correctness still means a lot is potentially at stake.
There might be relatively easy ways to make a difference and have other positive, follow-on effects. For example, male contraceptives might make a big difference in reducing unintended pregnancies and my understanding (a few years old) is that there aren’t many funders of relevant research. (I recognize that some people argue that the follow-on effects of other contraceptives like the pill are not fully positive and some believe they may even be negative.)
Abortion is ridiculously polarizing and seems to crowd out discussion of other important issues in politics. Maybe reducing its salience would help increase the ability to focus on other issues?
Obtaining an abortion imposes greater and greater costs in the US (financially, in time required, psychologically, health risks) as restrictions are rolled out.
The strategies engaged in by many pro-life advocates seem unlikely to significantly reduce abortion rates.
There has been some very cursory research into things like IUDs, artificial wombs, legislative action etc., but I don’t think the author ever finished or published it.
https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2016/03/new-clarity-us-abortion-debate-steep-drop-unintended-pregnancy-driving-recent-abortion
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4000282/