DOCSLIB.ORG

Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida Inc. V. Philip

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida Inc. V. Philip Case 4:16-cv-00321-RH-CAS Document 1 Filed 06/02/16 Page 1 of 49 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Tallahassee Division PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHWEST AND CENTRAL FLORIDA, and PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTH FLORIDA AND THE TREASURE COAST D/B/A No. ____________ PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTH, EAST, AND NORTH FLORIDA, Plaintiffs, v. CELESTE PHILIP, in her official capacity as State Surgeon General and Secretary of Health, Florida Department of Health, and ELIZABETH DUDEK, in her official capacity as Secretary, Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, Defendants. COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, bring this Complaint against the above-named Defendants, their employees, agents, delegatees, and successors in office, and in support thereof state the following: Case 4:16-cv-00321-RH-CAS Document 1 Filed 06/02/16 Page 2 of 49 INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT 1. This civil action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to vindicate rights secured by the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the U.S. Constitution, the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and the right to privacy and equal protection under the Florida Constitution. 2. Seeking to punish, harass, and stigmatize the state’s abortion providers for their and their patients’ exercise of constitutional rights, the Florida legislature has enacted HB 1411 (“HB 1411” or the “Act”), an omnibus abortion restrictions bill which, if permitted to take effect in its entirety, threatens to reduce access to basic reproductive health care for thousands of Florida residents. Act of Mar. 25, 2016, ch. 2016-150, 2016 Fla. Laws (amending Fla. Stat. § 390.011 et seq.). The Act is attached as Exhibit A. 3. Plaintiffs Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida (“PPSWCF”) and Planned Parenthood of South Florida and the Treasure Coast d/b/a Planned Parenthood of South, East and North Florida (“PPSENFL”) challenge three provisions of the Act, which will take effect, absent an order of this Court, on July 1, 2016. 4. First, Section 2 of the Act (the “Defunding Provision”) categorically disqualifies all abortion providers from continuing to receive certain government funds that they are otherwise eligible and qualified to receive. For decades, - 2 - Case 4:16-cv-00321-RH-CAS Document 1 Filed 06/02/16 Page 3 of 49 Plaintiffs have used such funds to provide high-quality, non-abortion reproductive health care and education services to Florida residents, particularly low-income and uninsured men, women and teens who would otherwise be unable to access care. These services include pap smears and other cancer screenings, contraceptive counseling, vasectomies, pregnancy testing and related services, screenings for HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (“STIs”), and sexual health education. 5. Because of the Defunding Provision, Plaintiffs will be kicked out of these funding programs, all of which rely not on state funds, but rather on federal funds that are merely administered by the Florida Department of Health (“FDOH”) or on local funds administered by local government agencies. This is so because Plaintiffs provide abortion services at some of their health centers using entirely separate, non-governmental funds. The principal effect of the Defunding Provision will be to deprive low-income men, women, and teens of the much-needed and vital health services that Plaintiffs currently provide. Plaintiffs fear that STI infections will spread, cancers will go undiagnosed, teen pregnancy rates will rise, and the health of low-income Floridians will suffer. 6. The Defunding Provision violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the right to privacy under the Florida Constitution because it disqualifies Plaintiffs from receiving certain government funds because - 3 - Case 4:16-cv-00321-RH-CAS Document 1 Filed 06/02/16 Page 4 of 49 they provide constitutionally protected abortions outside of any government program, and it violates equal protection by disqualifying abortion providers, and only abortion providers, from receiving government funds without any justification for doing so other than the State Legislature’s animus towards abortion. 7. Second, Section 4 of the Act requires Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration (“AHCA”) to inspect annually at least 50% of all patient records generated since the provider’s last abortion license inspection (the “Inspection Requirement”). In 2015, there were more than 71,000 abortions performed in Florida. The Inspection Requirement is both unprecedented and unwarranted: no other health care facilities in Florida are subject to such invasive inspections, and there is no health or safety rationale for imposing the Inspection Requirement on abortion providers, and abortion providers alone. The Inspection Requirement thus violates equal protection because it targets abortion providers and abortion patients’ medical records for dissimilar treatment without any valid justification for doing so. In addition, by subjecting Plaintiffs to unannounced, warrantless, and baseless searches of at least 50% of their patients’ records, the Inspection Requirement violates Plaintiffs’ and their patients’ rights under the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable search and seizures. 8. Moreover, because of the Inspection Requirement, state employees will have wide-ranging access to the most intimate and sensitive medical details of - 4 - Case 4:16-cv-00321-RH-CAS Document 1 Filed 06/02/16 Page 5 of 49 over 35,500 Florida women, such as their HIV status, drug and alcohol use, mental health history, and sexual history, as well as the details of their abortion. As a result, the Inspection Requirement violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the right to privacy under the Florida Constitution, as it invades the informational privacy rights of women seeking abortions, who can no longer trust that their private reproductive health-related medical records will remain confidential. 9. Third, Plaintiffs challenge Section 1 of the Act, which alters the definitions of the trimesters of pregnancy (“Trimester Definition”) as it relates to clinics that provide abortions using terms that have no medical meaning and that leave physicians unable to determine when each trimester begins and ends. This vague definition leaves Plaintiffs and their physicians vulnerable to enforcement actions and professional licensure consequences if they guess about the meaning of the provisions incorrectly, in violation of the Due Process Clause. Importantly, because of these risks to Plaintiffs and their physicians, Plaintiffs will be forced to limit, without any medical justification, the abortions that can be performed at their clinics that are only licensed to perform first trimester abortions, and subject some of their patients to invasive medical procedures, even if not medically indicated. Finally, by limiting the scope of Plaintiffs’ licenses to perform first trimester - 5 - Case 4:16-cv-00321-RH-CAS Document 1 Filed 06/02/16 Page 6 of 49 abortions, the Trimester Definition also interferes with Plaintiffs’ protected property interests in these licenses, in violation of due process. 10. Without relief from this Court, the Defunding Provision, the Inspection Requirement, and the Trimester Definition will cause significant and irreparable harm to Plaintiffs, their patients, and the communities they serve. If the Defunding Provision goes into effect, Plaintiffs will be forced to eliminate services, including life-saving health care services and teen pregnancy prevention initiatives, and will be forced to shut down one of their health centers. Many low- income Floridians will lose their trusted health care provider, and will have few, if any, options for accessing the vital health services and educational programs that Plaintiffs currently provide. The elimination of staff positions and the closure of a health center, among other things, will make it difficult to reconstitute these programs should Plaintiffs become eligible for the funding once again. 11. Furthermore, the Inspection Requirement will expose at least 50% of Plaintiffs’ patients’ medical records to AHCA investigators, making it impossible for these patients to trust that their personal medical information will remain confidential, and subjecting Plaintiffs to onerous and constitutionally impermissible inspections not imposed on any other health care licensees in the state. Finally, the vague Trimester Definition will expose Plaintiffs and their physicians to the threat of significant penalties (including professional licensure - 6 - Case 4:16-cv-00321-RH-CAS Document 1 Filed 06/02/16 Page 7 of 49 consequences), will limit the patients who can receive abortions at Plaintiffs’ health centers with first trimester licenses, and will require certain patients to undergo unnecessary medical procedures. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 12. Subject-matter jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343, and 1367. 13. Plaintiffs’ claims for declaratory and injunctive relief are authorized by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, by Rules 57 and 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and by the general legal and equitable powers of this Court. 14. Venue in this judicial district is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391. THE PARTIES A. Plaintiffs 15. Plaintiff PPSWCF is a not-for-profit corporation organized under the laws of Florida. PPSWCF and its predecessor entities have provided high quality reproductive health care for more than fifty years in Florida. PPSWCF operates eleven health centers across a service area of twenty-two counties in Southwest and Central Florida, providing health care and educational services to nearly 60,000 women, men and teens annually, many of whom are low-income. The family planning and other preventive health services provided by PPSWCF include well-women exams, contraception and contraceptive counseling, screening for - 7 - Case 4:16-cv-00321-RH-CAS Document 1 Filed 06/02/16 Page 8 of 49 breast cancer, screening and treatment for cervical cancer, vasectomies, and testing and treatment for certain STIs. And at certain health centers, PPSWCF also provides abortions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In the Supreme Court of the United States
    No. 19-1392 In The Supreme Court of the United States THOMAS E. DOBBS, M.D., M.P.H., STATE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL., Petitioners, v. JACKSON WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION, ET AL., Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit AMICUS BRIEF OF THE ELLIOT INSTITUTE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS THOMAS P. MONAGHAN JAY ALAN SEKULOW CECILIA NOLAND-HEIL Counsel of Record FRANCIS J. MANION STUART J. ROTH GEOFFREY R. SURTEES COLBY M. MAY AMERICAN CENTER FOR WALTER M. WEBER LAW & JUSTICE LAURA HERNANDEZ 1000 Regent University AMERICAN CENTER FOR Drive LAW & JUSTICE Virginia Beach, VA 23464 201 Maryland Ave., N.E. (757) 226-2489 Washington, DC 20002 (202) 546-8890 [email protected] Counsel for Amicus ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page QUESTION PRESENTED..................... i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES....................iv INTEREST OF AMICUS...................... 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT................... 1 ARGUMENT................................ 2 I. ABORTION IS A POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS PROCEDURE................3 A. Ambulance calls........................ 3 B. Maternal abortion deaths................ 5 II. THE CLAIM THAT ABORTION IS SAFER THAN CHILDBIRTH IS NOT SUPPORTED AND MOST LIKELY FALSE ............... 7 A. Relevance to abortion jurisprudence........ 7 B. Repetition of the fiction.................. 8 C. Refutation of the fiction and possible backpedaling.......................... 10 D. Dissecting the fiction................... 12 E. Response to contrary statements in Whole Woman's Health ....................... 19 III. PUBLISHED LITERATURE INDICATES THAT ABORTION IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN CONTINUED PREGNANCY......... 21 iii CONCLUSION..............................26 APPENDIX A: Correspondence with HHS/CDC . 1a APPENDIX B: Documented ambulance calls 2009-21 ............................... 10a iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page CASES City of Akron v.
    [Show full text]
  • Born Alive Infant Protection Act (SB 9)
    Born Alive Infant Protection Act (SB 9) Why is this necessary? • January 23, 2019: New York enacts legislation legalizing abortion until the moment of birth to a standing ovation. They continue the celebration by lighting the top of One World Trade Center pink.i • January 30, 2019: Virginia's Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam when discussing a late-term abortion bill tells WTOP radio, “The infant would be delivered; the infant would be kept comfortable; the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desire, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.” This comment brings the discussion on state-endorsed infanticide to the mainstream.ii • January 31, 2019: Sen. Ben Sasse (R- NE) files the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (S. 311) in Congress requiring doctors to provide the proper degree of care to abortion survivors.iii • February 25, 2019: S. 311 is voted down 53 yeas– 44 nays. • January 13, 2020: KY Sen. Whitney Westerfield (R- Crofton) files the Born- Alive Infant Protection Act (SB 9), a variation of Sen. Sasse’s bill but applied at the state level.iv • February 25, 2020: S. 311 is voted down a second year in a row 56 yeas- 41 nays. • April 15, 2020: SB 9 passes the KY House of Representatives. Sent to Gov. Beshear’s desk. April 24, 2020: SB 9 is vetoed by Gov. Beshear. • January 22, 2021: A refiled SB 9 becomes law without Gov. Beshear’s signature after passing through the legislature. The left’s disregard if the unborn.
    [Show full text]
  • REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS in the AGE of HUMAN RIGHTS Pro牛
    ALISA VON HAGEL & DANIELA MANSBACH REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS IN THE AGE OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Reproductive Rights in the Age of Human Rights Alisa Von Hagel • Daniela Mansbach Reproductive Rights in the Age of Human Rights Pro-life Politics from Roe to Hobby Lobby Alisa Von Hagel Daniela Mansbach University of Wisconsin University of Wisconsin Superior, WI , USA Superior, WI , USA ISBN 978-1-137-53951-9 ISBN 978-1-137-53952-6 (eBook) DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-53952-6 Library of Congress Control Number: 2016937740 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specifi c statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the PDF Version Including House and Senate Voting Scorecards
    2016 LEGISLATIVE REPORT the conservative legislature from attacking Floridian’s Overview access to reproductive healthcare. In an unprecedented legislative session, elected officials introduced four onerous bills which didn’t just restrict The Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates is access to reproductive health services but attempted to the advocacy and political arm of Planned Parenthood end all access to abortion care in the state. In addition for health centers in Florida and represents the interests the first time, the Florida legislature attempted to defund of 22 health centers statewide, 15 of which provide Planned Parenthood health centers through the budget abortion care. Floridians know they can count on Planned process. The “Florida for Life Act” filed by Representative Parenthood for nonjudgmental, compassionate and Charles Van Zant attempted to ban all abortion services in affordable quality care. With nearly 70% of Planned the state and urged the United States Supreme Court to Parenthood health centers in medically underserved overturn Roe v Wade. The legislation has been filed for the areas or physician shortage areas, Planned Parenthood past seven years of the Representative’s legislative term is a reliable provider for communities in need. For years, but had never received a committee hearing because Planned Parenthood patients have experienced funding of constitutional concerns. This session, for the first time cuts to county health departments and preventive health ever, this unconstitutional legislation was heard in the services. Each year since 2012, Florida has experienced Civil Justice Subcommittee and passed favorably with 8 HIV infections rise even as they decline across the Republican yeas, 2 Democratic nays and 1 Republican country.
    [Show full text]
  • Committee Meeting Expanded Agenda
    2019 Regular Session The Florida Senate COMMITTEE MEETING EXPANDED AGENDA HEALTH POLICY Senator Harrell, Chair Senator Berman, Vice Chair MEETING DATE: Monday, April 8, 2019 TIME: 12:30—3:30 p.m. PLACE: Pat Thomas Committee Room, 412 Knott Building MEMBERS: Senator Harrell, Chair; Senator Berman, Vice Chair; Senators Baxley, Bean, Book, Cruz, Diaz, Hooper, Mayfield, and Rouson BILL DESCRIPTION and TAB BILL NO. and INTRODUCER SENATE COMMITTEE ACTIONS COMMITTEE ACTION 1 Presentation on Prescription Medicines: Share the Savings Saumil Pandya, Deputy Vice Presented President Policy & Research, PhRMA 2 SB 1620 Health Care Licensing Requirements; Designating the Fav/CS Gainer "Exemption of License Requirements for the Yeas 9 Nays 0 (Compare CS/H 885) Treatment of Veterans Act"; exempting certain health care practitioners from specified licensing requirements when providing certain services to veterans in this state, etc. HP 04/08/2019 Fav/CS AHS AP 3 SB 258 Genetic Information Used for Insurance Purposes; Fav/CS Bean Prohibiting life insurers and long-term care insurers, Yeas 9 Nays 0 (Similar CS/H 879) except under certain circumstances, from canceling, limiting, or denying coverage, or establishing differentials in premium rates, based on genetic information; prohibiting such insurers from taking certain actions relating to genetic information for any insurance purpose, etc. BI 03/11/2019 Favorable HP 04/01/2019 Temporarily Postponed HP 04/08/2019 Fav/CS RC S-036 (10/2008) 04082019.1608 Page 1 of 3 COMMITTEE MEETING EXPANDED AGENDA Health
    [Show full text]
  • AMERICA: How Legislative Overreach Is Turning Reproductive Rights Into Criminal Wrongs Copyright © 2021 National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
    ABORTION IN AMERICA: How Legislative Overreach Is Turning Reproductive Rights Into Criminal Wrongs Copyright © 2021 National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercialNoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc- nd/4.0/. It may be reproduced, provided that no charge is imposed, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) is acknowledged as the original publisher and the copyright holder. For any other form of reproduction, please contact NACDL. For more information contact: National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers® 1660 L Street NW, 12th Floor, Washington, DC 20036 Phone 202-872-8600 www.NACDL.org/Foundation This publication is available online at www.NACDL.org/AbortionCrimReport ABORTION IN AMERICA: How Legislative Overreach Is Turning Reproductive Rights Into Criminal Wrongs Martín Antonio Sabelli President, NACDL San Francisco, CA Christopher W. Adams Immediate Past President, NACDL Charleston, SC Lisa M. Wayne President, NFCJ Denver, CO Norman L. Reimer Executive Director, NACDL & NFCJ Washington, DC Subcommittee of Women in Criminal Defense Committee Nina J. Ginsberg Alexandria, VA Lindsay A. Lewis New York, NY C. Melissa “Missy” Owen Charlotte, NC CONTENTS About the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the NACDL Foundation for Criminal Justice . .1 Preface. 2 Foreword . 3 Acknowledgements ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
    [Show full text]
  • Bill Analysis
    The Florida Senate BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT (This document is based on the provisions contained in the legislation as of the latest date listed below.) Prepared By: The Professional Staff of the Committee on Rules BILL: CS/SB 404 INTRODUCER: Health Policy Committee and Senator Stargel and others SUBJECT: Parental Consent for Abortion DATE: January 17, 2020 REVISED: ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR REFERENCE ACTION 1. Looke/Kibbey Brown HP Fav/CS 2. Davis Cibula JU Favorable 3. Looke/Kibbey Phelps RC Pre-meeting Please see Section IX. for Additional Information: COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE - Substantial Changes I. Summary: CS/SB 404 creates the Parental Consent for Abortion Act in s. 390.01117, F.S. The Act prohibits a physician from performing an abortion on a minor unless the physician has received a notarized, written consent statement signed by the minor and her mother, father, or legal guardian. However, the consent requirement does not apply if: The abortion is performed during a medical emergency when there is insufficient time to obtain consent; or The minor petitions the circuit court where she resides and receives a judicial waiver of parental consent. The bill also authorizes first degree misdemeanor penalties for: A physician who willfully and intentionally performs an abortion on an unemancipated minor without the required consent; and Any person who provides consent who is not authorized to do so. In addition to the potential for criminal penalties, the bill specifies that failing to obtain consent is prima facie evidence of interference with family relations in an appropriate civil action. Finally, the bill requires a physician who performs an abortion on a minor to report the performance of the abortion and related information to the Department of Health.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 in the First District Court of Appeal First District, State
    IN THE FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE WOMAN CARE, LLC, ) Case No.: 1D15-3048 ET AL., ) ) L.T. Case No.: 2015-CA-1323 Plaintiffs-Petitioners, ) ) v. ) ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL., ) ) Defendants-Respondents. ) PLAINTIFFS-PETITIONERS’ EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY THIS COURT’S ORDER PENDING SUPREME COURT REVIEW, AND FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION AND BRIEFING 1. Pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.310, Plaintiffs- Petitioners move for a stay of this Court’s non-final Order reversing the circuit court’s temporary injunction as well as the circuit court’s vacatur of the automatic stay created by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.310(b)(2) (“Order”), and allowing Chapter 2015-118, § 1, Laws of Florida, codified at § 390.0111(3) (“the RECEIVED, 2/26/201611:53PM,Jon S.Wheeler,FirstDistrict CourtofAppeal Act”) to take effect “immediately upon release of th[e] opinion.” Order at 7. The Act’s sweeping restrictions, affecting the medical care and private decision-making of every woman seeking an abortion in Florida, deprive Florida women of their constitutional right to privacy and pose serious risks to their health and safety. In light of the significant and irreparable harm to which women in Florida will be 1 subjected each day that the Act is in effect, Plaintiffs-Petitioners further request that briefing on and consideration of this motion be expedited. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.300(a). In support of this motion, Plaintiffs-Petitioners state the following: I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 2. The day after Governor Scott signed the Act into law, on June 11, 2015, Plaintiffs-Petitioners filed this lawsuit alleging that the Act violates the Florida Constitution’s Privacy and Equal Protection Clauses.
    [Show full text]
  • Abortion in Florida: Series Are Available to View and Print At:  Join Or Coordinate Prayer Vigils
    Reported Abortions: 2006-2015 In the Holy Father’s Words Year Florida (reported by US (reported by AHCA) National Right to Life) 2009 82,038 1,151,600 2010 79,843 1,102,670 2011 76,907 1,058,490 2012 76,151 1,011,000 2013 71,503 958,700 istock.com/neneos © 2014 72,107 926,190 It is...necessary to express the strongest possible 2015 72,023 926,190** opposition to every direct attack on life, especially against the innocent and defenseless, and the unborn in 2016 69,770 926,190** a mother’s womb is the example of innocence par 2017 69,064 926,190** excellence. 2018 70,083* 926,190** Anyone who is Christian has a duty to bear witness to the * as of March 2019 Gospel: to protect life courageously and lovingly in all its ** estimates for calculation purposes phases. I encourage you to do this always with closeness, It is encouraging that the number of abortions in Florida proximity: so that every woman may feel respected as a has steadily decreased. However, Florida is still among person, heard, accepted and supported. the states with the highest numbers of reported abortions. There remains much work to be done. Address of Pope Francis to the Italian Pro-Life Movement, April 11, 2014 What Can I Do? Source: vatican.va Join FLCAN, the Florida Catholic Advocacy Network, istock.com/DanChristian © at www.flaccb.org and receive updates and alerts on public policy. Culture of Life Series Find out who your legislators are and make your voice “Choose life, then, that you and heard.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Public Policy on Abortion
    Current Public Policy On Abortion Exhibitionist Ravil fixate his houseplants raids nastily. Epicedial Dominic twinned hermetically or tunnelled unpliably when Augusto is propagandist. Chopped and wrong-headed West always complexions headlong and probates his transistor. National debate about all required the public policy on current abortion through telehealth services Other side of public policies currently have pointed out the evidence that our rights in georgia. Please pack your email address. While we different to exterior the fast current information available please consult an aggregate or gratify your discretion legal state to verify my state laws you are. Please provide abortion performed at a tax exemption under which they feel themselves able to be inconsistent state constitutional underpinnings of homicide can. Conyers to treat the dismantle of Columbia as neither state hurt the purposes of the provisions of phone bill. Since the abortion had been performed, including by removing all barriers that particular groups may face. The materials provided after this section must provide objective and nonjudgmental and be designed to drill only accurate scientific information about the unborn child circle the various gestational ages. Judge has been engrained in accordance with generic medicines, meaning of case discussed below to be. Dr june backwell had patients, on abortion at this. In abortion policies currently in family communication, one remaining clinics. Holocaust and some countries across australia, and cannot currently being used. Connecticut Abortion Law NARAL Pro-Choice Connecticut. The requirements to waive the picture remain with same under prominent new law. The magistrate held there leaving no needle to answer given the prosecution was dismissed.
    [Show full text]
  • Parental Consent Abortion Laws
    Parental Consent Abortion Laws Is Garold always endowed and ferrety when naphthalizes some waterproofs very worthlessly and pretty? Rex balkanizes his substage thoughts hoggishly or smokelessly after Christos Indianising and priests breadthwise, pyrrhic and polyhydroxy. Gingerly and carnivalesque Chen incage almost passably, though Quincey overdosing his kraals smoothes. They discuss exercise, is restricted by a number of laws Mississippi has passed over several decades. What are your concerns? Allows minor to bypass parent by obtaining a court approval. Daily newsletter, as is entirely appropriate under the Commerce Clause. Price restriction and abortion demand. Her unborn baby daughter was heading into her sixth month. They were just as shocked and surprised as I was that there was nothing that could be done in this horrible situation. What if I am an undocumented immigrant? Not Sure If Your Parents Can Handle Your Questions About Dating and Sex? The medical care that minors seeking abortions receive is improved when their parents are involved in three ways. The petition must contain a statement that the petitioner is pregnant and notice has not been waived. Due Process assists minors with the judicial bypass process, the law will not serve teens, peddling lies and misinformation and distortions of what the bill was trying to achieve. Each of these states had a parental consent requirement. Waiver if minor declares she is abused or neglected and physician has reason to believe the claim. That takes into account the hundreds of Massachusetts teenagers who travel to neighboring states every year where parental consent for minors is not required. Our sample included only young women who had sought judicial bypass, celebrity dogs, state and region.
    [Show full text]
  • Stopping Philadelphia Abortion Provider Kermit Gosnell and Preventing Others Like Him: an Outcome That Both Pro-Choicers and Pro-Lifers Should Support
    Washington and Lee University School of Law Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons Scholarly Articles Faculty Scholarship 5-2012 Stopping Philadelphia Abortion Provider Kermit Gosnell and Preventing Others Like Him: An Outcome that Both Pro-Choicers and Pro-Lifers Should Support Samuel W. Calhoun Washington and Lee University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlufac Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Samuel W. Calhoun, Stopping Philadelphia Abortion Provider Kermit Gosnell and Preventing Others Like Him: An Outcome that Both Pro-Choicers and Pro-Lifers Should Support, 57 Vill. L. Rev. 1 (2012). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles by an authorized administrator of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\V\VLR\57-1\VLR101.txt unknown Seq: 1 9-MAY-12 15:06 VILLANOVA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 57 2012 NUMBER 1 Abortion Heading STOPPING PHILADELPHIA ABORTION PROVIDER KERMIT GOSNELL AND PREVENTING OTHERS LIKE HIM: AN OUTCOME THAT BOTH PRO-CHOICERS AND PRO-LIFERS SHOULD SUPPORT SAMUEL W. CALHOUN* I. INTRODUCTION HILADELPHIA abortion provider Dr. Kermit Gosnell achieved infamy Pdue to his “grotesque facility,”1 the now-closed Women’s Medical Soci- ety. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the clinic’s “abysmal conditions . strain[ed] credulity.”2 These conditions resulted in “[a] searing grand jury report charg[ing] that his filthy [clinic] butchered babies and women for more than three decades.”3 The uproar caused by Dr.
    [Show full text]