Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

March-15-10

Court to Hear Arguments on IL Parental Notification Law

A Cook County, Illinois, Circuit Court will hear arguments today on a state parental notification law that has been stalled in the state since 1995. In November 2009 the Illinois Medical Disciplinary Board decided that the state parental notification law should go into effect, but briefly thereafter, Judge Daniel Riley granted a temporary restraining order blocking implementation of the law. According to Associated Press, Judge Riley will hear today's arguments.

The law in question mandated that physicians notify a young woman's parents at least 48 hours before performing abortions on women 17 or younger. The law includes a judicial bypass and does not require notice in cases of sexual abuse or if there is a medical emergency. Illinois law does not require that parents consent regarding the abortion, only their notification prior to the procedure.

The law originally passed in 1984 and was updated in 1995, but has been held up for years by legal challenges. A Chicago federal appeals court ruled in July that the law is constitutional. In its decision, the court described the law as "a permissible attempt to help a young woman make an informed choice about whether to have an abortion". The law was to go into effect on November 3rd. The anti-choice Thomas More Society filed a lawsuit in September with the Illinois Supreme Court that sought immediate enforcement of the law, but this request was not granted.

The order was granted as a result of a lawsuit filed in October 2009by the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois on the behalf of the Hope Clinic for Women and Dr. Allison Cowett. This suit challenged the law's constitutionality and stated that "the Act severely restricts minors' access to abortion by requiring a physician to notify a parent, grandparent, step-parent living in the household, or legal guardian of a minor's intention to terminate her pregnancy and wait at least 48 hours before performing the abortion."

Media Resources: Feminist Daily Newswire 11/6/10; Associated Press 3/15/10


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/20/2014 North Carolina Board of Elections Eliminates On-Campus Voting Sites Across the State - North Carolina will begin state-wide early voting on Thursday, and unlike the 2012 presidential election, many students across the state will have no polling place on-campus, making it more difficult for students to exercise their right to vote. The North Carolina State Board of Elections recently eliminated the only on-campus voting location for the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, a campus with more than 20,000 students. . . .
 
10/20/2014 Jay Leno Receives Mark Twain Prize, Salutes Mavis and Her Work for Women's Rights - Former long-time host of "The Tonight Show" Jay Leno saluted his wife, Mavis, for her work on behalf of women's rights around the world when he was awarded the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor this weekend at The Kennedy Center in Washington, DC. The Mark Twain prize is awarded for comedic achievement, and the event, where Leno performed a monologue and paid tribute to the many comedians he has worked with throughout his career, brought together supporters of the The John F. . . .
 
10/20/2014 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Slams Supreme Court for Upholding Voter Suppression in Texas - Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issued a blistering dissent after a ruling by the US Supreme Court this weekend threatened to disqualify more than half a million Texas voters from early voting. In an unsigned order Saturday, a majority of the Supreme Court sided with a Texas law requiring voters to produce specific forms of photo identification in order to cast a ballot in the 2014 election. . . .