Bill Overview
Title: Pregnant Students’ Rights Act
Description: This bill requires a public institution of higher education (IHE) that participates in federal student-aid programs to provide information to admitted and enrolled students on the rights and resources for students who are pregnant or may become pregnant. These rights and resources must exclude abortion services. Additionally, the IHE must establish a protocol to meet with students who believe they were discriminated against based on pregnancy. The IHE must also provide pregnancy-related questions to enrolled students and annually submit compiled responses to the Department of Education.
Sponsors: Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL]
Target Audience
Population: People who are students at public IHEs and may experience pregnancy-related issues during their education
Estimated Size: 3500000
- The bill applies to public institutions of higher education (IHE) participating in federal student-aid programs, which includes a vast number of colleges and universities throughout the United States.
- These institutions have many students, some of whom may already be pregnant or may become pregnant during their time at the institution.
- The bill is likely targeting a small group of the student population since not all students in higher education are pregnant or will become pregnant during their studies.
- However, it is important to consider a broader range of individuals who might fall into this category over time, particularly undergraduates who are more likely to become pregnant.
Reasoning
- We assumed a broad cross-section of students likely to be impacted by the policy, including those who are already pregnant, those who may become pregnant, and those concerned about pregnancy-related discrimination.
- The interviews include perspectives of male students who might not directly benefit but can provide insights into broader cultural and institutional changes.
- The policy budget constraints suggest that implementation will be widespread across many institutions but not so deeply integrated that every aspect of a student's life will be transformed. We reflect that in the varying impact levels seen in the interviews.
- Considering the policy focuses on public institutions, we included accounts from larger institutions with significant student bodies that will see noteworthy implementation of the policy.
- We distributed scores to reflect immediate expected benefits primarily in information access and mitigated discrimination, which could lead to moderate-long term wellbeing increases.
Simulated Interviews
student (California)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's good to have this information handy. Even if I'm not pregnant yet, it's comforting to know what my rights are.
- I do worry about discrimination, so having a protocol to report issues makes me feel safer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
student (Texas)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I won't be directly affected, but it's good to know our campus is doing something about student rights.
- More students knowing their rights can create a better environment overall.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
graduate student (New York)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a single parent and currently pregnant, having resources dedicated to my needs is a relief.
- I’ve faced subtle discrimination before, so having a reporting protocol is reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
student (Florida)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not pregnant, but I think it's helpful to know what my rights are just in case.
- The information could help if I know someone experiencing this too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
student (Ohio)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though I'm less directly impacted, having supportive structures for all students, including pregnant ones, seems fair.
- Such policies may not change much in my wellbeing directly, but they improve campus culture.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
student (Virginia)
Age: 20 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I had a scare last term, and I was confused about what help was available.
- Knowing about these resources earlier would have reduced my anxiety.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
student (New Mexico)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I re-enrolled to complete my degree, but lack of pregnancy rights recognition was why I left initially.
- The new policy gives me hope and assurance I'm making the right choice to return.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
student (Illinois)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Balancing work, school, and pregnancy is overwhelming.
- Having structured support through policy could ease my schedule and stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
student (Michigan)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My partner's comfort is essential for both our happiness, knowing her rights are protected helps.
- Supportive policy may influence a broader acceptance culture in campus.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
student (Washington)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might have altered my personal decisions if it was in place earlier.
- I support the increase in rights and hope it becomes stronger.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $50000000)
Year 2: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $50000000)
Year 3: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $50000000)
Year 5: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $50000000)
Year 10: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $50000000)
Year 100: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $50000000)
Key Considerations
- The cost estimation must consider the vast number of public IHEs and their varying sizes, which affects implementation costs differently.
- Consider the sensitivity of compliance costs, which might differ significantly across institutions based on pre-existing resources.
- Potential benefits of the policy may not immediately translate into fiscal savings or GDP growth but could yield educational and social benefits over time.