Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Tytuł pozycji:

Abortion Disclosure Laws and the First Amendment: The Broader Public Health Implications of the Supreme Court's Becerra Decision.

Tytuł:
Abortion Disclosure Laws and the First Amendment: The Broader Public Health Implications of the Supreme Court's Becerra Decision.
Autorzy:
Pomeranz JL; Jennifer L. Pomeranz is with the Department of Public Health Policy and Management, College of Global Public Health, New York University, New York.
Źródło:
American journal of public health [Am J Public Health] 2019 Mar; Vol. 109 (3), pp. 412-418. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 Jan 24.
Typ publikacji:
Journal Article
Język:
English
Imprint Name(s):
Publication: Washington, DC : American Public Health Association
Original Publication: New York [etc.]
MeSH Terms:
Government Regulation*
Legislation as Topic*
Supreme Court Decisions*
Abortion, Induced/*legislation & jurisprudence
Abortion, Legal/*legislation & jurisprudence
Ambulatory Care Facilities/*legislation & jurisprudence
Public Health/*legislation & jurisprudence
Adult ; California ; Female ; Humans ; Legislation, Medical ; Pregnancy ; Pregnant Women ; United States
References:
Food Drug Law J. 2015;70(1):25-37. (PMID: 26292470)
Health Aff (Millwood). 2015 Nov;34(11):1986-92. (PMID: 26526259)
JAMA. 2018 Jan 16;319(3):227-228. (PMID: 29340685)
N Engl J Med. 2018 Oct 18;379(16):1489-1491. (PMID: 30156965)
Entry Date(s):
Date Created: 20190125 Date Completed: 20191113 Latest Revision: 20210302
Update Code:
20240105
PubMed Central ID:
PMC6366505
DOI:
10.2105/AJPH.2018.304871
PMID:
30676798
Czasopismo naukowe
In 2018, the US Supreme Court analyzed a California state requirement that clinics serving pregnant women must provide government notices-1 for licensed clinics about the availability of state health services including abortion and 1 for unlicensed clinics, notifying potential clients that the clinics are not licensed medical facilities and have no licensed medical professionals on-site. The Supreme Court found that both notices violated the First Amendment rights of the clinics. The Supreme Court's opinion elicits new uncertainties about the government's ability to require the disclosure of factual information in the context of reproductive health services and more broadly in the commercial context. However, the Supreme Court's silence on 1 of the state's purposes for the unlicensed clinic notice, which was to address deceptive speech by the clinics, highlights a potential avenue for future regulation. Policymakers can require the disclosure of factual information in the commercial context specifically to prevent consumer deception consistent with the First Amendment. Public health researchers can generate evidence to support such disclosure requirements intended to protect health and safety.
Zaloguj się, aby uzyskać dostęp do pełnego tekstu.

Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies