|
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 |
| National Family Planning v. Sullivan [3 November 1992] |
| United States. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit |
| FEDERAL REPORTER. 2D SERIES. 1992;979:227-42. |
| The plaintiffs challenged the validity of directives under which the US Department of Health and Human Services |
| interpreted Regulations issued in 1988 as permitting physicians working within Title X programs to provide |
| counseling on abortion in the context of a physician-patient relationship. Previously, the regulations had been |
| interpreted to prohibit abortion counseling or referral of any kind within a Title X program. The plaintiffs claimed that |
| the directives had been issued improperly. The Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, accepted this claim |
| and enjoined implementation of the directives. It held that the directives were "legislative" rather than "interpretive" in |
| nature and, thus, could not be issued before notice and an opportunity to comment had been given to the public. It |
| pointed to the fact that the new directives construed the Regulations in a manner that substantially changed the |
| effect of the Regulations and that, prior to the change, the Department of Health and Human Services had defended |
| the previous interpretation of the Regulations all the way to the Supreme Court, which had upheld their validity. |
| (PubHealth.info Document ID: CONT3T 1565-06) |
| PubHealth.info NOTE: The author(s) of this article titled, "National Family Planning v. Sullivan [3 November 1992]", |
| is(are) United States. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. The source of this article is "FEDERAL |
| REPORTER. 2D SERIES. 1992;979:227-42.". This article was published in 1992 in English language(s). |
| (PubHealth.info® Document ID: CONT3T 1565-06. All rights reserved with PubHealth.info) PIN: 11565 |
|
|
|
© 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. |