• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Produced at Temple
    • Center for Public Health Law Research
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Produced at Temple
    • Center for Public Health Law Research
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of TUScholarShareCommunitiesDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsGenresThis CollectionDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsGenres

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Help

    AboutPeoplePoliciesHelp for DepositorsData DepositFAQs

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    After June Medical Services: The Past, Present, And Future Of Regulating Reproduction

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Genre
    Video
    Date
    2020-06-30
    Author
    Rebouché, Rachel
    Cohen, David S.
    Goodwin, Michele
    Sanger, Carol
    Ziegler, Mary
    McCammon, Sarah
    Group
    Center for Public Health Law Research (Temple University Beasley School of Law)
    Harvard Law and Policy Review (Harvard University)
    Florida State University College of Law
    Department
    Law
    Subject
    Abortion--Law and legislation--United States
    Abortion--Government policy--United States
    Abortion--Political aspects--United States
    Abortion
    Abortion services
    Permanent link to this record
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/7475
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    DOI
    http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/7453
    Abstract
    Where does abortion law in the United States stand, and where are we headed? In the wake of Supreme Court’s landmark decision, June Medical Services v. Russo, join the authors of four influential books on reproductive health, Professors David S. Cohen, Michele Goodwin, Carol Sanger, and Mary Ziegler, for a conversation moderated by NPR’s Sarah McCammon about the past, present, and future of the law and politics of reproduction. The authors’ insights also bring into focus recent state policies that have deepened inequalities and strained access to pregnancy and abortion care during the pandemic.
    Citation
    Center for Public Health Law Research, After June Medical Services: The Past, Present, And Future Of Regulating Reproduction (Webinar), YouTube (Jun. 30, 2020), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeKDUUbBd9E
    Citation to related work
    Center for Public Health Law Research
    ADA compliance
    For Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu
    Embedded videos
    Collections
    Center for Public Health Law Research

    entitlement

     

    Related items

    Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.

    • Thumbnail

      Assuring Access to Abortion

      Center for Public Health Law Research (Temple University) (2021)
      Over the spring of 2020, numerous states announced measures suspending abortions in response to COVID-19. Banning abortion during the pandemic is counterproductive. Impeding access to abortion will not help preserve healthcare resources. Moreover, prohibiting access to abortion care exacerbates the strain on the healthcare system. People who lack access to abortions will travel to neighboring states, induce their own abortions, or carry pregnancies to term, which will require prenatal care and assistance in childbirth. Perhaps more importantly, the people hit hardest by suspending abortion care are those for whom the pandemic already has had devastating effects. Lifting restrictions on medication abortion and expanding telehealth abortion services will conserve healthcare resources and improve public health. Recognizing the advantages of telemedicine, some states, as well as the federal government, have relaxed restrictions on remote diagnosis and treatment. However, many of those same states have carved out exceptions for abortion in their telemedicine policies. In addition, people seeking medication abortions still face unnecessary restrictions on access, none of which are applied to comparable office-based procedures. Policymakers can eliminate barriers to safe abortion services now and in the future. “No-touch” terminations, in which all medical supervision happens over the telephone or online, can better accomplish the goals that the present abortion suspensions cannot. Telehealth for medical abortion can ease the burdens on pregnant people, healthcare workers, and health systems in light of the unprecedented challenges presented by COVID-19.
    • Thumbnail

      A Functionalist Approach to Comparative Abortion Law

      Rebouché, Rachel (2014)
      This chapter critiques the present comparative methodology in abortion law and explores the possibilities of a new comparative approach. The current method relies on high-­ profile but dated constitutional abortion decisions from the United States and Germany. Courts continue to rely on these cases to justify their decisions as consistent with a modern, global convergence around women’s rights and to minimize national resistance to contested law reform. These comparisons, however, oversimplify legal developments of the past forty years by focusing on constitutional norms and legislative regimes, rather than on the relationship between abortion law and practice.
    • Thumbnail

      Abortion Opportunism

      Rebouché, Rachel (2020-05-18)
      Eleven states have tried to suspend abortion care in response to COVID-19. State officials claim that they will preserve medical supplies, hospital space, and health care capacity by classifyingabortion as an elective, non-essential surgery that must be delayed. Advocacy groups representing abortion providers sued in several states to enjoin these bans. What has emerged is a fight that ignores medical evidence and threatens to exacerbate the current public health emergency. The Executive Order issued in Texas offers an apt example. Though abortion may be available in Texas for the time being, opinions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit provide a troubling roadmap for suspending constitutional rights as a health emergency measure.
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2022)  DuraSpace
    Temple University Libraries | 1900 N. 13th Street | Philadelphia, PA 19122
    (215) 204-8212 | scholarshare@temple.edu
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.