Case No. 1-10-1463
IN THE FIRST DISTRICT APPELLATE COURT
______________________________________
THE HOPE CLINIC FOR WOMEN LTD.
; and
ALLISON COWETT
, M.D., M.P.H.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants
,v.
BRENT ADAMS
, Acting Secretary of the Illinois Departmentof Financial and Professional Regulation, in his official capacity;
DANIEL BLUTHARDT
, Director of the Division of ProfessionalRegulation of the Illinois Department of Financial and ProfessionalRegulation, in his official capacity; and
THE ILLINOIS STATEMEDICAL DISCIPLINARY BOARD
,
Defendants-Appellees
.______________________________________On Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County,County DepartmentChancery DivisionHonorable Daniel A. Riley, Judge Presiding______________________________________
AMICUS CURIAE
BRIEF OF ILLINOIS LEGISLATORSIN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
______________________________________Mailee R. Smith (IL Bar No. 6280167)Americans United for Life655 15th Street NW, Suite 410Washington, D.C. 20005Telephone: 202.289.1478
Counsel for Amici Curiae
i
POINTS AND AUTHORITIESARGUMENT
.................................................................................................................................1
Statute
750 Ill. Comp. Stat. 70/5. ................................................................................................................1
CasesBellotti v. Baird
, 443 U.S. 622 (1979). ...........................................................................................1
Gonzales v. Carhart
, 550 U.S. 124 (2007). ....................................................................................2
H.L. v. Matheson
, 450 U.S. 398 (1981). .........................................................................................2
Roper v. Simmons
, 543 U.S. 551 (2005). ........................................................................................2
I. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT LAWS SUCH AS THE ACT DECREASEABORTION AND BIRTH RATES AMONG MINORS
...............................................3
A. Parental Involvement Laws Decrease the Abortion Rate
.......................................3
Other Authorities
D. Haas-Wilson,
The Impact of State Abortion Restrictions on Minors' Demand for Abortions
, J.
H
UMAN
R
ESOURCES
31(1):140 (1996). ......................................................................3D. Haas-Wilson,
The economic impact of state restrictions on abortion: Parentalconsent and notification laws and Medicaid funding restrictions
, J.
P
OLICY
A
NALYSIS
&
M
ANAGEMENT
12(3):498 (1993). ...................................................................................................3P. Donovan,
Judging teenagers: How minors fare when they seek court authorized abortions
, F
AMILY
P
LANNING
P
ERSPECTIVES
15(6): 259 (1983). ...........................................3, 5, 6R.M. Blank et al.,
State Abortion Rates: The Impact of Policies, Providers, Politics,Demographics, and Economic Environment
, J. H
EALTH
E
CON
. 15:513 (1996). ............................3R.L. Ohsfeldt & S.F. Gohmann,
Do Parental Involvement Laws Reduce Adolescent Abortion Rates?
, C
ONTEMPORARY
E
CON
.
P
OL
’
Y
12(2):65 (1994). ................................................3M.J. New,
Analyzing the Effect of State Legislation on the Incidence of Abortion AmongMinors: A Report of the Heritage Center for Data Analysis
, C
ATHOLIC
S
OC
.
S
CI
.
R
EV
.(Fall 2007). ..................................................................................................................................3, 4
iiC. Ellertson,
Mandatory parental involvement in minors' abortions: Effects of the laws inMinnesota, Missouri, and Indiana
, A
MER
.
J.
P
UB
.
H
EALTH
87(8):1367 (1997). ........................4, 5V.G. Cartoof & L.V. Klerman,
Parental consent for abortion: Impact of theMassachusetts law
, A
MER
.
J.
P
UB
.
H
EALTH
76(4):397 (1986). ......................................................5J.L. Rogers et al.,
Impact of the Minnesota Parental Notification Law on abortion and birth
, A
MER
.
J.
P
UB
.
H
EALTH
81(3):294 (1991). .............................................................................5R.W Blum et al.,
The impact of a parental notification law on adolescent abortiondecision-making
, A
MER
.
J.
P
UB
.
H
EALTH
77(5):619 (1987). ..........................................................5T. Joyce et al.,
Changes in Abortion and Births and the Texas Parental Notification Law
,
N.E.J.M. 354(10):1031 (2006). .......................................................................................................6P.B. Levine,
Parental involvement laws and fertility behavior
, J.
H
EALTH
E
CON
.22(5):861 (2003). ............................................................................................................................6
B. Parental Involvement Laws Decrease the Birth Rate
..............................................7
Other Authorities
J. Rogers & A. Miller,
Inner-City Birth Rates Following Enactment of the MinnesotaParental Notification Law
, L
AW
&
H
UMAN
B
EHAVIOR
17(1):27 (1993). ......................................7J.L. Rogers et al.,
Impact of the Minnesota Parental Notification Law on abortion and birth
, A
MER
.
J.
P
UB
.
H
EALTH
81(3):294 (1991). .............................................................................7T.J. Kane & D. Staiger,
Teen Motherhood and Abortion Access
,
Q
UARTERLY
J.
E
CON
.111(2):467 (1996). ..........................................................................................................................7C. Jackson & J. Klerman,
Welfare, Abortion and Teenage Fertility
, RAND Corporationworking paper, August 1994. ..........................................................................................................7R.L. Ohsfeldt & S.F. Gohmann,
Do Parental Involvement Laws Reduce Adolescent Abortion Rates?
, C
ONTEMPORARY
E
CON
.
P
OL
’
Y
12(2):65 (1994). ................................................7T. Joyce et al.,
Changes in Abortion and Births and the Texas Parental Notification Law
,
N.E.J.M. 354(10):1031 (2006). ...................................................................................................7, 8
II. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT LAWS SUCH AS THE ACT PROTECTMINORS FROM THE PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL HARMSINHERENT IN ABORTION
...........................................................................................8
A. Minors who abort face demonstrated physical risks
...............................................8
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
More From This User
Notes
Load more
