|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
1) While the state’s attempt under its new rules and regulations to license abortion clinics may seem innocuous or well-meaning at first glance, they severely threaten womens ability to choose an abortion in a number of ways. First, by treating abortion differently from all other comparable medical procedures and subjecting it to a unique level of micro-management and governmental oversight, the licensing laws segregate abortion providers and patients from the rest of medical practice and relegate abortion services to a status below other health care. Second, by subjecting abortion providers to criminal and civil penalties, exposing them to harassment, and intruding significantly into their practice of medicine, the new rules deter physicians from becoming or remaining abortion providers. Thus, the regulations threaten to reduce the number of abortion providers, particularly in private practices, resulting in less access for women to abortion services. Third, by imposing requirements that significantly raise the cost of providing abortions, the licensing laws increase abortion prices, causing some women to delay or even forego desired abortions. Fourth, by imposing medically unnecessary, and at times inappropriate, requirements on abortion provision, the state’s new rules interfere with physicians’ ability to exercise their medical judgment in the best interests of their patients. The state’s new rules and regulations to license abortion clinics raise a variety of constitutional concerns. By burdening and marginalizing abortion provision, the licensing laws may violate women’s rights to choose abortion and to equal protection of the laws. To the extent that the state’s schemes threaten abortion patients’ confidentiality, they may also violate women’s right to informational privacy. The regulations may also violate the constitutional rights of abortion providers in three ways: by subjecting them to vague criminal laws; by forcing them to comply with unreasonable searches; and by violating their right to equal protection of the laws. First, some of the licensing laws should be found to violate the rights of abortion providers and their patients to equal protection of the laws. As a medical or health matter, abortion is no different from many other outpatient procedures that do not trigger state regulation. ... The new rules infringe on a womans right to choose an abortion and should therefore be upheld only if they are narrowly drawn to serve legitimate purposes.
Approximate Word count = 1828
Approximate Pages = 7.3
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|