Emily Velasquez and Nicole Zigon
AP U.S History
Ms. Strong
June 4, 2018
Planned parenthood v. Casey
Should women have to undergo provisions such as spousal consent and a 24 hour waiting period to have an abortion, even though Roe v Wade states that abortions are prohibited from being banned in most states and gives women the right to have an abortion with little exceptions? In discussion the controversial issue in the case Planned Parenthood of Pennsylvania v Casey is that the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act is unconstitutional in multiple ways. The Pennsylvania Abortion control act brought the attention of doctors to contradict this new act because the provisions required to get an abortion violated a woman’s right because it deprives them of their life and liberty.
This case planned parenthood v Casey is about how women should have the choice to abort a baby without going through provisions. The fourth amendment section 1 states “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” (4th amendment).To make women seeking an abortion obligated to undergo the said provisions is “enforcing a law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”
From as early as 1891, the Court has recognized that the rights of autonomy, bodily integrity, and equality are central to the notions of ordered liberty of our country. Like men women should be able to have the right to make their own decisions without having to go through multiple provisions. In order to have an abortion going through obstacle can cause unnecessary problems to the women in the need of abortion.
The provisions from the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act, a 24 hour waiting period and spousal notification, should not be obligated for women to do in order to have an abortion. Both could be detrimental to their physical and even mental health. If the court ruled that women could not have abortions at all because these provisions were not wanted, then women would potentially have to go to back alleys for their medical care and to get abortions. Disagreements between husband and wife over a woman’s decision to have an abortion can get violent in some cases, which puts the woman in even more danger. (oyez.org). Making women have to undergo these provisions in order to have an abortion is an overall detriment to their health and lifestyle.
In a previous case, Danforth v Planned Parenthood of Missouri in 1976, it was specifically stated that the only people that must be of knowledge of a woman’s abortion is the women herself and her physician. (embryo.asu.edu). This case supports Planned Parenthood v Casey because it presents and implies the idea that spousal notification is not needed or necessary, and it shows that it has been in effect for years. While pregnancy is seen as a blessed act, forced pregnancy, like any other bodily invasion, is contradicting American traditions and values. In the case Roe v. Wade
For the longest time, the Constitution has recognized an individual’s right to make private and intimate decisions about marriage, family life, and the use of contraceptives. This is no different. A woman’s right to do what she wants with her body is just as important as other intimate decisions. If the government prevents a woman from doing what she wants with her body, it could be detrimental to her mentality and physical health. If the Government cannot require individuals to sacrifice their lives or health for others or for other compelling purposes, it cannot require women to sacrifice their lives and health to further the State's interest in potential life.