Judges Are Denying Teen Abortions for Their Own Moral Reasons
In 37 states, an underage person seeking an abortion without their guardians' approval has to go to court, where a judge may refuse their case based on personal belief.
by Julia Ries
Jan 16 2020
According to new research, up to 13 percent of all teens seeking to get legal approval for an abortion without their parent’s involvement or consent are getting denied by judges in Texas, up from a mere 2.8 percent only a few years before. The study published in the American Journal of Public Health on Thursday is the first research to look at how often judges deny teens’ petitions for abortion, and mostly due to the judges’ personal and political opinions and not the actual merits of the cases, like if the procedure is medically recommended.
Thirty-seven states currently require pregnant minors to get the green light from one or both parents before receiving an abortion. It’s estimated that, depending on the state, anywhere from two percent to 23 percent of teens seeking an abortion pursue it via judicial bypass, which dates back to a 1979 U.S. Supreme Court decision which ruled that parents do not have an "absolute veto” over a child’s abortion.
39 Abortion Stories Show Just How Important Abortion Access Is
There's one story for each of the 39 Senators who asked the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade.
By Danielle Campoamor
January 9, 2020
On January 2, 39 GOP Senators signed an AMICUS brief urging the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court case that secured the legal right to abortion. In the brief, these senators, along with 168 Republican members of the House, asked the sitting Supreme Court Justices to revisit and overturn Roe v Wade when they consider a case based on a Louisiana law that could severely limit access to abortion in the state.
For each of these 39 Senators, most of whom are cis men who will never know what it’s like to be pregnant when you do not want to be, I wanted to talk to 39 people who do know that feeling.
How Trump's latest efforts to stop abortion increasingly undermine global health
Canada recently committed a record amount toward safe abortion services. Will that be enough to combat the impacts of the US' revised ‘global gag rule’?
By: Urooba Jamal
July 16, 2019
The dilemma for a health organization is hard to fathom.
In 2018, two young women died at the hands of knitting needles and other everyday objects in Kenya, where seven women die each day in an attempt to induce an abortion on their own, bereft of safer options.
Even two years earlier, their deaths might have been prevented. But a local organization that would have previously referred them to abortion provision services was forced to choose between giving sexual and reproductive healthcare advice or signing a “global gag rule” and stopping that program, in order to continue to provide HIV services to its 10,000 clients.
Forging A New Path Toward Universal Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
January 31, 2019
By Sarah Barnes & Elizabeth Wang
"The Guttmacher-Lancet Commission could not come at a better time,” said Patricia Da Silva, Associate Director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation United Nations Liaison Office. “It is indeed the call to action that is required; showing us that comprehensive sexual and reproductive rights must be ensured for all.” She spoke at a recent Wilson Center event on the work of the Guttmacher-Lancet Commission on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR). The Commission, an international collaboration of 16 SRHR experts from Africa, Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and North and South America, recently published a report, Accelerate Progress—Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights for All, which makes concrete recommendations for countries to address SRHR gaps and inequalities.