|
PubHealth.info®
(a subsidiary of
PakMed) presents scientific information mainly
based on abstracts of articles published on a variety of public health issues/topics,
particularly encompassing
population planning, disease prevention, maternal and child health,
and communicable and
non-communicable diseases (like HIV AIDS, malaria, etc) that are
affecting a significant portion of population in developing and
developed
countries. Here you can find abstracts of articles published on a variety of public health
topics under category "Contraception
(Birth Control) and Family Planning".
Contraception (birth control)
is a regimen of one or more actions, devices, or medications followed in
order to deliberately prevent or reduce the likelihood of a woman
becoming pregnant or giving birth. Therefore contraception is the
utilization of various and sundry surgical procedures, devices,
practices, agents, or drugs with the intention of preventing conception
or impregnation (pregnancy). Methods and intentions typically termed
birth control may be considered a pivotal ingredient to family
planning. Birth control is a controversial political and ethical
issue in many cultures and religions, and although it is generally less
controversial than abortion specifically. |
|
|
| CATEGORY: |
Contraception (Birth Control) and Family Planning |
| Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin v. Doyle. |
| Issues in Law and Medicine. 1998 Fall;14(2):209-14. |
| This paper reports the outcome of a legislative case by plaintiff Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin and 6 Wisconsin |
| physicians against Wisconsin Attorney General James E. Doyle and Dane County District Attorney Diane Nicks in |
| their official capacities. The plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of 1997 Wisconsin Act 219, passed as |
| Assembly Bill 220 (AB 220) and codified at 895.038 and 940.16, Wis. Stats. ("the Act"). The Act subjects those who |
| intentionally perform a partial-birth abortion to civil and criminal liability. Moreover, the plaintiffs submitted affidavits |
| containing physicians' declaration that there is no such procedure called "partial-birth abortion" and other pertinent |
| information to refute Act 219. Despite the effort, the plaintiffs failed to establish a likelihood of success on the |
| merits or an irreparable injury flowing from enforcement of Act 219 banning partial-birth abortion. The court found that |
| none of the arguments presented by the plaintiff is sufficient enough to gain merit. In conclusion, the court opined: |
| State laws are entitled to a presumption of constitutionality, Wisconsin's attempt to ban a gruesome and less than |
| humane procedure which physicians occasionally use to kill a child partially born into this world must be accorded |
| the deference it deserves. In this light, the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction was denied. (PubHealth.info |
| Document ID: CONT2T 36-06) |
| PubHealth.info NOTE: The author(s) of this article titled, "Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin v. Doyle.", is(are) |
| Bostrom BA. The source of this article is "Issues in Law and Medicine. 1998 Fall;14(2):209-14.". This article was |
| published in 1998 in English language(s). (PubHealth.info® Document ID: CONT2T 36-06. All rights reserved with |
| PubHealth.info) PIN: 5036 |
|
|
|
© Copyrights PubHealth.info®,
an information portal on public health. All rights
reserved.
This page is optimized to be viewed by
Java script enabled Microsoft®
Internet Explorer 6 or later version, at screen resolution of 800 by 600 pixels. |