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

9/12/2014 Violence Against Women Act Turns 20 - Saturday will be the 20th Anniversary of the groundbreaking federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Passed in 1994, VAWA was the first piece of federal legislation to specifically address domestic violence and sexual assault as crimes and to provide federal funding to improve local response to violence against women, including training and resources for law enforcement and judges. President Barack Obama on Tuesday issued a proclamation commemorating the VAWA anniversary. . . .
 
9/12/2014 Indiana Woman Charged With Feticide For Premature Delivery - An Indiana woman has been charged with feticide after she delivered prematurely and sought hospital treatment. Purvi Patel, 33, sought help at an emergency room for vaginal bleeding where it was discovered that she had delivered prematurely at home. . . .
 
9/11/2014 Missouri Legislators Pass 72-Hour Abortion Waiting Period Law - Missouri legislators voted late last night to triple the state's current 24-hour waiting period to 72 hours, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Governor Jay Nixon previously vetoed the bill in July, calling it "extreme and disrespectful." Missouri's House voted 117-44 to override the veto, and then the Senate used a procedural move to stop a Democratic filibuster of the bill and vote 23-7 to complete the veto override Wednesday. "The only purpose of a 72-hour waiting period is to attempt to punish, shame, and demean women who have arrived at a personal decision that politicians happen to disagree with," said the president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights in a statement. . . .