The Post-Roe World and the Disability Community: A Forgotten Frontier of Reproductive Rights
Author: McKennis Orren
Published: 2025/10/17
Publication Type: Opinion Piece, Editorial
Category Topic: Studies and Theory - Academic Publications
Page Content: Synopsis - Introduction - Main - Insights, Updates
Synopsis: This article examines how the post-Roe v. Wade landscape disproportionately threatens disabled people's reproductive autonomy and medical safety, a dimension of the abortion debate that remains largely overlooked in mainstream discourse. Drawing on historical context of eugenics in America and Nazi Germany, the piece connects forced sterilization policies to contemporary threats facing disabled individuals who now lack abortion access in 26 states. The article is particularly valuable because it illuminates why reproductive freedom matters urgently for disabled people facing heightened sexual assault rates, medical complications from pregnancy, and existing vulnerabilities to guardianship abuse—realities that extend beyond abstract rights debates to questions of literal survival. For disabled individuals, seniors navigating complex health decisions, and anyone concerned with bodily autonomy and medical justice, this work provides essential grounding in why reproductive restrictions carry specific and severe consequences for marginalized communities already subject to systemic control - Disabled World (DW).
Introduction
On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. This decision eliminated the federal protection of the right to an abortion. After this tragic decision, many states returned to their previous abortion restrictions, with many states having trigger laws on the books that automatically went into effect with the overturn, which weren't enacted. This has caused states like Texas to enact laws that require citizens to report if they suspect someone they know is going to get or has reserved an abortion or a provider that is conducting them.
The effects of this decision have disproportionately affected people of color and low-income communities, the people who are already systemically oppressed. The effects of this design are even more apparent when you look at a population that has closely followed it, the disability community. "More than 3 million disabled women of reproductive age (15-49) live in the 26 states that have banned or are likely to ban abortion since Dobbs" (National Partnership for Women & Families). With these bans disabled people have wondered what that will mean for their own family planning.
Main Content
Eugenics and the History of Control
In the United States and globally, when disabled people are discussing family planning, many times, people are addressing eugenics. Eugenics is a bogus "science" that was coined by Francis Galton in 1883. "Eugenicists applied emerging theories of biology and genetics to human breeding" (The Conversation).
In the United States, "more than 60,000 people were sterilized in 32 states during the 20th century" (The Conversation). These states' sterilization laws informed Nazi Germany and were used to rationalize the Holocaust. This program, which predated World War II, was known as T-4 and operated between 1939 and 1945. Disabled people, primarily children, were examined by doctors, and then if they were considered "unfit," "useless," or "handicapped," they were injected or gassed to kill them. This became the blueprint for the Nazi's mass killings in the Holocaust.
Possible Effects
So reproductive rights and disability have always been tied. A society that decides who is allowed to live or be born and removes the "undesirables," oftentimes the people of color, the disabled, and other marginalized communities, is practicing eugenics. In this post, Dobbs Country, what will this mean for disabled people and for the influences of disabled people that will be born?
Assault
The lack of abortion access puts many disabled people at severe risk. The first is the need for an abortion for their own well-being, as they are more likely to be assaulted. "According to a survey conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, disabled people were over three times more likely than nondisabled people to experience sexual assault. The likelihood increases for people with multiple disabilities" (NPR). With the high number of assaults on disabled people, the need for an abortion is statistically more likely. For many conditions, pregnancy is not recommended as it puts the person in harm's way. Abortion access is also not all about the right to terminate, but, like with Britney Spears, reproductive rights also mean the right to choose to become a parent.
Medical Risk
Many pro-life advocates state that they do not want to harm. Still, people with some disabilities will suffer further medical complications or death as a result of carrying a pregnancy to term. "When abortion is unavailable, people with these disabilities are forced into pregnancies that directly jeopardize their health and survival" (American Bar Association). Conditions with heart, connective tissue, or respiratory complications are advised not to become pregnant, as it can lead to organ failure, stroke, or death.
Bodily Autonomy
Some disabled people do not have their own bodily autonomy when it comes to their medical decisions. This lack of autonomy is outside the government intervention currently in place. Sometimes, people are placed under a medical proxy, guardianship, or conservatorship, which has been used to make medical decisions like sterilization, unwanted birth control, or termination of a wanted pregnancy. This can be seen with celebrities like Britney Spears, who had an IUD placed by her conservator, who was her father.
Right to Decide
With a history of forced sterilization and institutionalization, bodily autonomy has always been part of the disability rights movement. The right to work, use the bathroom, and be seen in public are all rights thought of as evident for many people, but for those who are disabled, these are rights that were debated, legislated, and fought for.
Effects on the Next Generation's
These effects are not only on the current disabled community but on the generations to come. With legislation, like the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, that requires everyone who is receiving Medicaid to reapply for care every six months, medical care is harder. This will create a greater administrative burden for disabled people and public servants. This will put the health of disabled people and the general public into jeopardy. As of October 2024, "In the seven to 14 months after Roe v. Wade was overturned, we saw a 7% increase in infant mortality, and a 10% increase in those babies born with congenital anomalies," said Singh, an assistant professor of epidemiology (The Ohio State University). Many people do not think of the impact of their policy in conjunction with the existing public policy. With the marginalization of disabled people and the probable uptick in the number of disabled people. Without these safety nets, how is the country going to take care of the increasing number of disabled people? If history repeats itself, it will probably be in a way with a high administrative burden and low payout for the amount of work.
Protecting Disabled Lives Protects Everyone
So, with the overturn of Roe v. Wade, disabled people, like the general population, will be forced to carry a child from a possible assault, more at risk for medical complications from pregnancies, a return to a lack of bodily autonomy, and stripped of medical care, while putting procedures in place to have a larger disabled population. With policy like the Dobbs decision, bodily autonomy is under attack for all Americans, but policy like this is all too familiar to the disability community. Ed Roberts, a pioneer of the independent living movement, is remembered for saying, "There are only two kinds of people in the world: the disabled, and the yet-to-be-disabled." Disability rights are equality rights. Everyone will become disabled if they live long enough. So protecting disabled people is protecting everyone that you know.
In protecting reproductive rights, we are protecting the fundamental promise of equality for disabled people today and for everyone yet to become disabled tomorrow.