Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Rounds: The Journey to Protect Women’s Mental Health with Relevant, Truthful and Not Misleading Information in Informed Consent Abortion Statutes
Kathleen G. Chewning, 3 Charleston L. Rev. 601 (2009)
Part II of this Note begins by mapping abortion law through its relevant history, starting with Roe v. Wade. Part II.A of the Note then details the birth of judicial allowance and interpretation of informed consent statutes with the seminal case of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. Additionally, this section of the Note will provide the basis for the requirement that disclosures pursuant to informed consent abortion statutes be relevant and truthful and not misleading information. Part II.B.i will then address the recent Gonzales v. Carhart decision and its emphasis on the effects of abortion on a woman’s mental health. This will be followed by an analysis of the effects of abortion on women’s health, examined in light of recent conflicting studies over whether such a correlation exists. Part II.B.ii identifies case law which analyzes whether and which information relating to abortion regulation is relevant, truthful and not misleading information. Finally in Part III, this Note addresses Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Rounds and its potential far-reaching effects on the future of informed consent abortion regulation.
