Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Judge blocks key parts of new Arizona abortion law

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
DesertRat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-29-09 09:14 PM
Original message
Judge blocks key parts of new Arizona abortion law
A state judge on Tuesday blocked implementation of several key parts of a new Arizona law restricting abortions, while allowing a few provisions to take effect.

The preliminary injunction issued by Judge Donald Daughton of Maricopa County Superior Court
allows a 24-hour waiting period to take affect, but he blocked requirements that a woman see a doctor in person for advance disclosures before getting an abortion.

The so-called “informed consent” consultation can be by telephone and by a qualified staff member, Daughton said in his ruling granting most of a request by Planned Parenthood, the state's major abortion provider.

The state judge also blocked provisions prohibiting nurse practitioners
from performing surgical abortions, requiring the notarizing of parental consent forms and expanding an existing law that now permits health-care workers to refuse to participate in abortions.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2009/09/29/20090929abortion0930.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Liberal_in_LA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-29-09 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. "notarizing of parental consent forms" - if that were required next anti-choicers would have
Notaries refusing to notarize based on religious convictions. They never stop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-29-09 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. Good, but need to stop letting them nibble away at women's rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DesertRat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-29-09 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. At least this ruling is a step in the right direction
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_in_LA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-29-09 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC