Legal

Title By Description Created Last modifiedsort ascending
The Food and Drug Administration’s Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule (2014) Caroline Meek In 2014, the United States Food and Drug Administration published the Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule to amend previous guidelines for the prescription of drugs for pregnant and lactating women. The 2014 Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule was intended to increase the safety and efficacy of prescription drugs by making drug labels easier for physicians to understand and utilize. 2019-04-29 30 Apr 2019 - 10:36:15am
US Food and Drug Administration’s Requirements on Content and Format for Labeling for Human Prescription Drugs Rule (1979) Caroline Meek 2018-09-10 26 Jan 2019 - 2:50:58am
California Proposition 71 (2004) Ceara O'Brien The California Stem Cell Research and Cures Act, also called Proposition 71, was a ballot initiative proposed by California voters in 2004 to allocate three billion dollars of state funds for stem cell research over ten years. Endorsed by California scientists and patient-advocates, Prop 71 passed on 2 November 2004, amending the state constitution to make stem cell research a constitutional right. In addition, Prop 71 led to the creation of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), in San Francisco, California to allocate 2014-04-03 15 Jan 2019 - 2:49:50am
Isaacson v. Horne (2013) Claudia Nunez-Eddy In the 2013 case Isaacson v. Horne, the US Court of Appeals in the Ninth Circuit ruled that Arizona House Bill (HB) 2036, which prohibited abortions after twenty weeks of gestation, was unconstitutional. The Arizona State Legislature passed the law in 2012, which was then challenged by three physicians who filed a lawsuit against the state, arguing that the law violated women's constitutionally protected rights to abortions, rights that may only be infringed once fetuses are viable outside of the womb. 2016-11-16 15 Jan 2019 - 2:27:38am
Tucson Woman's Clinic v. Eden (2004) Claudia Nunez-Eddy The case Tucson Woman's Clinic v. Eden (2004) established that some of Arizona's abortion clinic laws violated physicians' and patients' rights to privacy, and it required those laws to be rewritten. The laws required most abortion providers to be licensed with the Arizona Department of Health Services and to submit to all the regulations the Department established for abortion clinics. The regulations allowed the state to search abortion clinics without warrants and to access patient records and ultrasound prints, among other provisions. 2016-11-14 15 Jan 2019 - 2:27:10am
Planned Parenthood Center of Tucson, Inc., v. Marks (1972) Claudia Nunez-Eddy In the 1972 case Planned Parenthood Center of Tucson, Inc., v. Marks, the Arizona Court of Appeals required the Arizona Superior Court to rehear the case Planned Parenthood Association v. Nelson (1971) and issue a decision on the constitutionality of Arizona's abortion laws. In 1971, the Planned Parenthood Center of Tucson filed the case Planned Parenthood Association v. Nelson asking for the US District Court to rule on the constitutionality of the Arizona Revised Statutes 13-211, 13-212, and 13-213, which made it illegal for anyone to advertise, provide, or receive an abortion. 2016-11-13 15 Jan 2019 - 2:26:33am
Simat Corp v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (2002) Claudia Nunez-Eddy In the 2002 case Simat Corp v. Arizona Health Care Containment System, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that the Arizona Health Care Containment System must pay for abortions when they are necessary to preserve the health of pregnant women in the system. In the case, the Court ruled that the Arizona Revised Statutes 35-196.02 and the Arizona Health Care Containment System (AHCCCS) policies, which banned public funds from being used for abortions, were unconstitutional. AHCCCS is Arizona's Medicaid insurance system, which enables low-income residents to receive medical care. 2016-11-13 15 Jan 2019 - 2:25:53am
Nelson v. Planned Parenthood Center of Tucson (1973) Claudia Nunez-Eddy The 1973 case Nelson v. Planned Parenthood Center of Tucson established the legality of abortion in Arizona. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that the Arizona Revised Statutes 13-211, 13-212, and 13-213, collectively called the Arizona abortion statutes, were unconstitutional. The statutes had made illegal receiving, providing, or advertising abortions. After the Arizona Appeals Court heard the case, it decided that the Arizona abortion statutes were constitutional. However, two weeks later the US Supreme Court decided in Roe v. 2016-11-13 15 Jan 2019 - 2:24:47am
Barry Morris Goldwater (1909–1998) Claudia Nunez-Eddy Barry Morris Goldwater was a Republican Arizona Senator and US presidential candidate in the twentieth-century whose policies supported the women's reproductive rights movement. Goldwater, a businessman and Air Force reservist, transitioned into politics in the 1950s. He helped align popular support for a conservative Republican Party in the 1960s. Throughout his life, he worked to maintain personal liberty and to limit governmental intrusion into citizens' private lives. Goldwater, influenced by his wife Margaret (Peggy) Goldwater, supported women's rights to abortions. 2016-10-28 15 Jan 2019 - 2:22:24am
Jeter v. Mayo (2005) Jennifer E. Chapman In Jeter v. Mayo, the Court of Appeals of Arizona in 2005 held that a cryopreserved, three-day-old pre-embryo is not a person for purposes of Arizona's wrongful death statutes, and that the Arizona Legislature was best suited to decide whether to expand the law to include cryopreserved pre-embryos. The Court of Appeals affirmed a decision by the Maricopa County Superior Court to dismiss a couple's wrongful death claim after the Mayo Clinic (Mayo) allegedly lost or destroyed several of their cryopreserved pre-embryos. 2016-10-22 15 Jan 2019 - 2:20:59am
1901 Arizona Comstock Law Lakshmeeramya Malladi In 1901, the Arizona Territorial Legislature codified territorial law that illegalized advertising, causing, or performing abortions anywhere in Arizona. The 1901 code, in conjunction with the federal Comstock Act, regulated the advertisement and accessibility of abortion services and contraceptives in Arizona. The Federal Comstock Act of 1873 had illegalized the distribution of material on contraceptives and abortions through the US Postal Services by labeling contraceptive and abortive material as obscene. 2017-06-28 15 Jan 2019 - 2:12:16am
State v. New Times, INC (1973) Claudia Nunez-Eddy In the 1973 case State v. New Times, INC, the Arizona Court of Appeals in Phoenix, Arizona, ruled that Arizona Revised Statutes 13-211, 13-212, and 13-213, collectively called the Arizona abortion statutes, were unconstitutional. The statues made it illegal for anyone to receive, provide, or advertise abortion services. The Arizona Court of Appeals reviewed a case in which a city court in Tempe, Arizona, convicted the New Times, a newspaper headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, of advertising abortion. 2017-06-23 15 Jan 2019 - 2:10:22am
Planned Parenthood Committee of Phoenix v. Maricopa County (1962) Claudia Nunez-Eddy In the 1962 case Planned Parenthood Committee of Phoenix v. Maricopa County, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that Arizona Revised Statute 13-213, which banned the public advertising of contraceptive or abortion medication or services, was constitutional. However, the court also ruled that that Arizona Revised Statute 13-213 did not apply to Planned Parenthood's distribution of contraceptive information, allowing Planned Parenthood to continue distributing the information. 2017-06-23 15 Jan 2019 - 2:06:28am
Forbes v. Napolitano (2000) Claudia Nunez-Eddy Forbes v. Napolitano (2000) was a US court case that established that Arizona researchers could use fetal tissues from induced abortions for basic scientific research, for instance, as a source of stem cells. The case challenged the constitutionality of the Arizona Revised Statute (ARS) 36-2303 in the Ninth Circuit US Court of Appeals, a law that banned researchers from using fetal tissues from abortions for any type of medical experimentation or investigation. The Ninth Circuit US Court of Appeals decision in Forbes v. 2016-11-13 15 Jan 2019 - 12:25:21am
“Improving Women’s Health”: Section 3509 of the Affordable Care Act of 2010 Reem Gerais In 2010, US Congress enacted section 3509 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or ACA, to target issues relating to women’s health. The ACA, signed into law by US President Barack Obama, aimed to increase people’s access to high-quality healthcare in the United States. 2018-03-25 14 Jan 2019 - 11:49:23pm
Physician Labeling Rule (2006) Caroline Meek In 2006, the United States Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, published the “Requirements on Content and Format of Labeling for Human Prescription Drug and Biological Products,” also called the Physician Labeling Rule, to improve the safety and efficacy of prescription drugs and drug products. Within the Physician Labeling Rule, the FDA includes a section titled “Use in Specific Populations” or Section 8, which refers to drugs used by pregnant women, lactating women, and people of reproductive capacity. 2018-07-24 25 Jul 2018 - 1:38:50am
Roe v. Wade (1973) Claudia Nunez-Eddy, Sharaden Seward In the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade, the US Supreme Court ruled that laws banning abortion violated the US Constitution. The Texas abortion laws, articles 1191–1194, and 1196 of the Texas penal code, made abortion illegal and criminalized those who performed or facilitated the procedure. Prior to Roe v. Wade, most states heavily regulated or banned abortions. The US Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade secured women's rights to terminate pregnancies for any reasons within the first trimester of pregnancy. 2018-07-03 6 Jul 2018 - 12:51:59am
Sterilization Act of 1924 Nathalie Antonios The passage of the Virginia Sterilization Act of 1924 demonstrates how science has been used to drive policy throughout history. In the case of the Virginia sterilization law, the science used to draft the law was based on the principles of eugenics. With the help of Harry Laughlin's Model Sterilization Law, the state of Virginia was able to pass its own law allowing sterilization of the feebleminded, expressing sterilization as a health issue that needed to be protected from the public. 2011-04-14 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Gonzales v. Carhart (2007) Mark Zhang In Gonzales v. Carhart (2007), the US Supreme Court held in a five-to-four decision that the 2003 Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act passed by the US Congress was constitutional. Although the Court previously ruled in Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) that a Nebraska law that prohibited partial-birth abortions was unconstitutional, Gonzales reversed this decision. Gonzales created the precedent that anyone who delivers and kills a living fetus could be subject to legal consequences, unless he or she performed the procedure to save the life of the mother. 2012-02-28 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Paretta v. Medical Offices for Human Reproduction [Brief] (2003) Brock Heathcotte The court decided a child of in vitro fertilization born with cystic fibrosis does not have the right to sue for wrongful life even in the presence of demonstrable acts of medical negligence because to allow such a case would grant the IVF child rights not possessed by naturally born children. The decision in Paretta has not been publicly tested in other jurisdictions. 2008-05-09 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Smith v. Cote (1986) Nathalie Antonios The case of Smith v. Cote (1986) answered two important questions concerning law and childbirth: does the State of New Hampshire recognize a cause of action for what is defined as wrongful birth, and does the State recognize a cause of action for what is classified as wrongful life? In the case of Smith v. Cote, damages were permitted for wrongful birth, but not for the action of wrongful life. 2011-03-24 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
The People of the State of New York v. Margaret H. Sanger (1918) Lakshmeeramya Malladi In 1918, the New York State Court of Appeals in Albany broadened the justification physicians could use to prescribe contraceptives to married patients in the case The People of the State of New York v. Margaret H. Sanger (People v. Sanger). The presiding judge of People v. Sanger, Frederick Crane, ruled that under Section 1145 of the New York Penal Code physicians could provide contraceptives to married couples for the prevention of disease. 2018-01-22 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Barack Obama Executive Order 13505, November 2008 Aroob Khokhar On 20 November 2009 Democrat Barack Obama replaced Republican George W. Bush as president of the United States. Obama soon initiated changes to Bush's 2001 executive order concerning scientific research involving human stem cells. Stem cell research remains a controversial issue in the US. Some individuals consider it immoral to experiment with an embryo because they regard embryos as human beings from the moment of conception, while others believe stem cell research could lead to great scientific advancements. 2010-06-17 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
US Regulatory Response to Thalidomide (1950-2000) Chanapa Tantibanchachai Thalidomide, a drug capable of causing fetal abnormalities (teratogen), has caused greater than ten thousand birth defects worldwide since its introduction to the market as a pharmaceutical agent. Prior to discovering thalidomide's teratogenic effects in the early 1960s, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did not place regulations on drug approval or monitoring as it later did. By 1962, approximately 20,000 patients in the US had taken thalidomide as part of an unregulated clinical trial before any actions were taken to stop thalidomide's distribution. 2014-04-01 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
A.Z. v. B.Z. [Brief] (2000) Brock Heathcotte The Massachusetts Supreme Court in a case of first impression decided that a prior written agreement between a husband and wife regarding the disposition of frozen embryos in the event of a divorce was unenforceable. This was the first case to reject the presumption that written agreements to conduct in vitro fertilization practices were binding. The court would not force the husband to become a parent merely because he signed a consent form that would have awarded the frozen embryos to his wife in the event of marital separation. 2008-05-09 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
The US President's Council on Bioethics (2001-2009) Ceara O'Brien The US President's Council on Bioethics was an organization headquartered in Washington D.C. that was chartered to advise then US President George W. Bush on ethical issues related to biomedical science and technology. In November 2001, US President George W. Bush created the President's Council on Bioethics (PCB). Convened during a nationwide cloning and embryonic stem cell research debate, the Council stated that it worked to address arguments about ethics from many different perspectives. 2014-02-18 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) Carolina J. Abboud In the 1989 case Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, the US Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a Missouri law regulating abortion care. The Missouri law prohibited the use of public facilities, employees, or funds to provide abortion counseling or services. The law also placed restrictions on physicians who provided abortions. A group of physicians affected by the law challenged the constitutionality of certain sections of it. The US federal district court that first heard the case ruled many of the challenged sections of 2017-02-26 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Weber v. Stony Brook Hospital (1983) Jack Resnik The New York Court of Appeals' 1983 case Weber v. Stony Brook set an important precedent upholding the right of parents to make medical decisions for newborns born with severe congenital defects. A pro-life New York attorney, Lawrence Washburn, attempted to legally intervene in the case of Baby Jane Doe, an infant born with disorders. When the infant's parents chose palliative care over intensive corrective surgery, Washburn made repeated attempts to have the New York courts force through the surgery. 2011-04-25 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
In the Matter of the Marriage of Dahl and Angle (2008) Jennifer E. Chapman, Mark Zhang In the 2008 court case In the Matter of the Marriage of Dahl and Angle, the Court of Appeals of Oregon upheld a written in vitro fertilization (IVF) consent form signed by Laura and Darrell Angle, who had each contributed their genetic material to the creation of several preembryos during their marriage. Its decision followed the general framework for resolving such disputes provided by the Supreme Court of Tennessee in Davis v. Davis in 1992, which was subsequently followed by many courts across the US. 2014-05-06 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Kass v. Kass (1998) Jennifer E. Chapman, Mark Zhang In Maureen Kass v. Steven Kass (1998), the Court of Appeals of New York in Albany, New York, ruled that the state should generally consider IVF consent forms signed by participants in an in vitro fertilization (IVF) program valid, binding, and enforceable in the event of a dispute. The court indicated that decisions regarding the handling of cryopreserved pre-zygotes, often called preembryos, contained within these consent forms should be upheld. 2013-11-01 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Nightlight Christian Adoptions, et al. v. Thompson, et al. (2001) Megan Kearl Nightlight Christian Adoptions et al. v. Thompson et al. was a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on 8 March 2001. The suit was filed because Nightlight Christian Adoptions, a frozen embryo adoption agency, felt that the Guidelines for Research Using Human Pluripotent Stem Cells published by the National Institutes for Health were unlawful and violated the restrictions on human embryo research put into place by the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. Additional plaintiffs with this suit were the Christian Medical Association, adult stem cell researcher Dr. 2010-09-28 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
J. B. v. M. B. (2001) Jennifer E. Chapman In 2001, the Supreme Court of New Jersey decided a dispute between a divorced couple over cryopreserved preembryos created through in vitro fertilization (IVF) during the coupleÕs marriage. The former wife (J.B.) wanted the preembryos destroyed, while her former husband (M.B.) wanted them to be used for future implantation attempts, such as by an infertile couple. In J.B. v. M.B. (2001), the court declined to force J.B. to become a parent against her will, concluding that doing so would violate state public policy. 2013-11-17 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Commonwealth v. Luceba Parker [Brief] (1845) Brock Heathcotte The Court settled the question left open from the case of Commonwealth v. Bangs that it must be proved a woman was "quick with child" in order for abortion prohibitions to have any effect in Massachusetts. 2010-09-12 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Jeter v. Mayo Clinic Arizona [Brief] (2005) Brock Heathcotte In Arizona, statutes that protect persons, such as the wrongful death statute, will not be interpreted by the courts to grant personhood status to frozen embryos. The legislature may grant such protection in the statute if it chooses to do so by explicitly defining the word person to include frozen embryos. 2008-05-09 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Doe v. Bolton (1973) Carolina J. Abboud In the 1973 court case Doe v. Bolton, the US Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., ruled that a Georgia law regulating abortion was unconstitutional. The Georgia abortion law required women seeking abortions to get approval for the procedure from their personal physician, two consulting physicians, and from a committee at the admitting hospital. Furthermore, under the statutes, only women who had been raped, whose lives were in danger from the pregnancy, or who were carrying fetuses likely to be seriously, permanently malformed were permitted to receive abortions. 2017-11-29 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Status and Value Term Descriptions Brock Heathcotte Descriptions of terms utilized in law articles. Terms like probable, questionable, and doubtful are defined and values of case precedents are explained. 2008-05-09 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Whitner v. South Carolina (1997) Chanapa Tantibanchachai In the case Whitner v. South Carolina in 1997, the South Carolina State Supreme Court defined the concept of a child to include viable fetuses. This allowed grounds for prosecution of a pregnant womanÕs prenatal activity if those activities endangered or could potentially endanger the fetus within her. The case brought the issue of fetal rights versus pregnant womenÕs rights to light. 2014-11-30 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Doolan v. IVF America [Brief] (2000) Brock Heathcotte The implication of the court's decision was that Thomas Doolan's identity or personhood existed at the embryo stage in vitro, thus the fact that he was born with cystic fibrosis was not attributable to the decision of the in vitro fertilization providers to implant one embryo instead of another. The other unused embryo may not have carried the cystic fibrosis genes, but that other embryo was not Thomas Doolan. The decision in Doolan has not been publicly tested in other jurisdictions. 2008-05-09 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) Mark Zhang In Stenberg v. Carhart, the US Supreme Court ruled on 28 June 2000 that a Nebraska law banning partial birth abortions was unconstitutional. Though the US Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade in 1973 had set a precedent that constitutionally protected abortions, some states established limitations on certain types of abortion procedures. When NebraskaÕs state government criminalized partial birth abortions, physician LeRoy Carhart challenged the constitutionality of the case. Don Stenberg, an Attorney General located in Lincoln, Nebraska, represented the state of Nebraska. 2014-01-28 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Sheppard-Towner Maternity and Infancy Protection Act (1921) Katherine Madgett In November 1921, US Congress passed the National Maternity and Infancy Protection Act, also called the Sheppard-Towner Act. The Act provided federal funds to states to establish programs to educate people about prenatal health and infant welfare. Advocates argued that it would curb the high infant mortality rate in the US. 2017-05-18 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
China's One-Child Policy Lijing Jiang In September 1979, China's Fifth National People's Congress passed a policy that encouraged one-child families. Following this decision from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), campaigns were initiated to implement the One-Child Policy nationwide. This initiative constituted the most massive governmental attempt to control human fertility and reproduction in human history. These campaigns prioritized reproductive technologies for contraception, abortion, and sterilization in gynecological and obstetric medicine, while downplaying technologies related to fertility treatment. 2011-03-31 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Golden Rice Marci Baranski Golden Rice was engineered from normal rice by Ingo Potrykus and Peter Beyer in the 1990s to help improve human health. Golden Rice has an engineered multi-gene biochemical pathway in its genome. This pathway produces beta-carotene, a molecule that becomes vitamin A when metabolized by humans. Ingo Potrykus worked at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, Switzerland, and Peter Beyer worked at University of Freiburg, in Freiburg, Germany. The US Rockefeller Foundation supported their collaboration. 2013-09-17 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) Sheraden Seward Almost ten years after the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade (1973) the battle over abortion was still being waged. The reproductive rights of women in the United States were being challenged yet again by the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982. The act was comprised of four provisions that restricted the fundamental right a woman had to obtaining an abortion, as established in Roe v. Wade. The four provisions included spousal notification, information disclosure, a twenty-four hour waiting period, and parental consent for minors. 2009-01-13 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Dietrich v. Inhabitants of Northampton [Brief] (1884) Brock Heathcotte This influential opinion by famed jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. was copied by courts throughout the United States. For over sixty years, courts refused to recognize a cause of action on behalf of a child who died before or after birth as a result of injuries suffered in the womb because the fetus was considered legally a part of its mother and thus did not possess personhood. This policy changed after the decision in Bonbrest v. Kotz in 1946. 2008-05-09 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. (2007) Victoria Higginbotham Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. (Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood) was the 2007 US Supreme Court case in which the Court declared the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 constitutional, making partial birth abortions illegal. In 2003, the US Congress passed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which prohibited an abortion technique called partial birth abortion. A partial birth abortion is similar to, but not the same as, a Dilation and Extraction or D&X abortion, which is what the Ban was intended to prohibit. Gonzales v. 2018-06-01 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Litowitz v. Litowitz (2002) Jennifer E. Chapman, Mark Zhang In a dispute over the allocation of cryopreserved preembryos, the Supreme Court of Washington resolved the case of David J. Litowitz v. Becky M. Litowitz (2002) by reaching a decision that neither party wanted. David Litowitz sought to find adoptive parents for two cryopreserved preembryos created during his marriage to Becky Litowitz when the couple was attempting to have children using in vitro fertilization (IVF). Becky sought to implant the preembryos in a surrogate in an effort to parent a child. 2013-12-02 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association's suit against Monsanto, 2012 and 2013 Ernest Nkansah-Dwamena In March 2011 the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association and around sixty agricultural organizations (OSGATA et al.) filed a suit against Monsanto Company and Monsanto Technology L.L.C., collectively called Monsanto. The hearings for Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association (OSGATA) et al. v. Monsanto (2012) took place at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in Manhattan, New York. The district court's Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald dismissed OSGATA's suit. 2014-12-30 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
President George W. Bush's Announcement on Stem Cells, 9 August 2001 Samuel Philbrick On 9 August 2001, US President George W. Bush gave an eleven-minute speech from his ranch in Crawford, Texas, on the ethics and fate of federal funding for stem cell research. Bush also announced the creation of a special council to oversee stem cell research. In the speech President Bush acknowledged the importance of issues surrounding stem cell research to many Americans, presented different arguments in favor of and opposing embryonic stem cell research, and explained his decision to limit but not completely eliminate potential federal funding for embryonic stem cell (ESC) research. 2010-11-19 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
Social Implications of Non-Invasive Blood Tests to Determine the Sex of Fetuses Ceara O'Brien By 2011, researchers in the US had established that non-invasive blood tests can accurately determine the gender of a human fetus as early as seven weeks after fertilization. Experts predicted that this ability may encourage the use of prenatal sex screening tests by women interested to know the gender of their fetuses. As more people begin to use non-invasive blood tests that accurately determine the sex of the fetus at 7 weeks, many ethical questions pertaining to regulation, the consequences of gender-imbalanced societies, and altered meanings of the parent-child relationship. 2014-03-23 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am
City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1983) Lawton L. Jackson, Lakshmeeramya Malladi In the 1983 case City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health the US Supreme Court ruled that certain requirements of the city of Akron’s “Regulation on Abortion” ordinance violated women’s rights to abortions. Despite the legalization of abortion in the 1973, with the US Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade, individual states passed legislation regulating certain aspects of abortion. 2017-11-08 4 Jul 2018 - 4:40:59am

Pages