Marketing and Public Policy Implications of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization

Abstract

In June 2022, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution does not grant a right to abortion; thus, abortion should be governed by the states ( Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), 2022 WL 2276808; 2022 U.S. LEXIS 3057)). The Dobbs ruling impacts females’ healthcare during the estimated 39 years they can bear children. It also affects healthcare providers and the organizations in which they work, health insurers, pharmaceutical firms, social media platforms, and employers. Important marketing and policy concerns, including privacy, cross-border commerce, consumer vulnerability, and marketplace information flow will require study as stakeholders respond to this environmental change. We develop a framework for the “typical” female reproductive healthcare journey to identify some of the most important areas of research for marketing and public policy academics and policymakers.

Into the Woods: Making a Difference via Marketing and Public Policy Research

“…Diversity of perspectives ensures that the work published in JPP&M is grounded in science, and points to the importance of having an ERB that consists of people who acknowledge this. As we have seen through the decades, JPP&M is a journal where authors are likely to tackle important issues that might be polarizing; recent examples include critical race theory (Poole et al 2020), vaccines (DiDomenico, Nunan, and Pitardi 2022), mental health (Kemp, Davis, and Porter 2023), and abortion (Fitzgerald et al 2023). We continue to encourage submissions of these and other issues; certainly, there are many to find in the woods.…”

The protection of rights and advancement of GenderS: In conversation with Abigail Nappier Cherup, Kevin D. Thomas, Wendy Hein, and Jack Coffin

“…There is not a nation in the world where inequities related to gender have been eradicated (United Nations, 2023). Moreover, many nations are experiencing a reversal of progress as moral panic results in denial of inclusive measures and practices (ACLU, 2023;Barry-Hinton, 2022;Duncan-Shepherd & Hamilton, 2022;Herdt, 2009;ILGA-Europe, 2023;Miles, 2022;Nagourney & Peters, 2023;Rodríguez & Murtagh, 2022;Velasco, 2023), and laws or bans negate consumption choices related to reproductive rights and gender-affirming care (Bhatt et al, 2022;Costa, 2023;Fitzgerald et al, 2023;Steinfield et al, 2023;Wang & Cahill, 2018). These trends give us pause and call us to question what role academia can play in enriching the rights of GenderS and supporting the advancement of all gender/sex/ualities.…”