Distinctions in Disclosure: Mandated Informed Consent in Abortion and ART

Bernstein E. B. , “Disclosure Two Ways,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 43, no. 2 (2015): 245–254.

See Bernstein E. , “The Upside of Abortion Disclosure Laws,” Stanford Law & Policy Review 24, no. 1 (2013): 171–214 (detailing number of states requiring disclosure of inaccurate information about abortion and future fertility, breast cancer risk and suicide).

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 882 (1992).

See Vandewaler I. , “Abortion and Informed Consent: How Biased Counseling Laws Mandate Violations of Medical Ethics,” Michigan Journal of Gender & Law 19, no. 1 (2012): 1–70.

Tex. Health & Safety Code §171.012.

Tex. Dep't Health, “A Woman's Right to Know” (2003), at 17, available at <http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/wrtk/default.shtm> (last visited March 30, 2015). Studies have repeatedly found no link between induced abortion and later infertility. See, e.g., Atrash H. K. Rowland Hogue C. J. , “The Effect of Pregnancy Termination on Future Reproduction,” Ballière's Clinical Obstetrics & Gynecology 4, no. 2 (1990): 391–405.

Arato v. Avedon, 858 P.2d 598, 605 (Cal. 1993).

Minkoff H. Marshall M. F. , “Government-Scripted Consent: When Medical Ethics and Law Collide,” Hastings Center Report 39, no. 5 (2009): 21–23, citing Post R. , “Informed Consent to Abortion: A First Amendment Analysis of Compelled Physician Speech,” University of Illinois Law Review 2007, no. 3 (2007): 939–990.

See Bernstein , supra note 1, at note 38.

Cal. Health & Safety Code §125325 (West 2012).

See, e.g., Cal. Health & Safety Code §125335 (West 2012) (requiring egg donors for medical research receive “standardized medically accurate written summary of health and consumer issues associated with” oocyte retrieval. The guide is published by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, not the State of California, though the state health department has authority to approve substitute pamphlets).

See Casey , supra note 3, at 882–883.

See Bernstein , supra note 2, at 197 (footnotes omitted).

Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124, 159 (2007).

Cockrill K. Weitz T. , “Abortion Patients' perception of Abortion Regulation,” Women's Health Issues 20, no. 12 (2010): 12–19.

Id., at 15.

See, e.g., Knoppers B. M. , “From the Right to Know to the Right Not to Know,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 42, no. 1 (2014): 6–10.

See, e.g., Okla.Stat. Ann. tit. 63, §§ 1–738.2, −741.12 (2011).

See Tuller D. , “Payment Offers to Egg Donors Prompt Scrutiny,” New York Times, May 10, 2010.

Cal. Health & Safety Code §125325 (West 2012).

See Cal. Health & Safety Code §125118(c) (West 2012) (supporting existing requirements of informed consent, tailoring them to new research utilizing human oocytes).

See, e.g., Tex. Med. Providers Performing Abortion Servs. V. Lakey, 667 F.3d 570 (5th Cir. 2012) (upholding Texas disclosure law); Planned Parenthood Minn., ND, SD v. Rounds, 662 F.3d 1072 (8th Cir. 2011) (invalidating “risk of suicide” disclosure); Karlin v. Foust, 188 F.3d 446 (7th Cir. 1999) (upholding “fetal heartbeat” disclosure).

See Borgmann C. E. , “Roe v. Wade 40th Anniversary: A Moment of Truth for the Anti-Abortion Rights Movement?” Stanford Law & Policy Review 24, no. 1 (2013): 245–70.

Though many argue ART should be regarded within the reproductive liberty realm. See, e.g., Robertson J. A. , Children of Choice (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994).

For example, commercial surrogacy is banned in 9 states. See Daar J. , Reproductive Technologies and the Law, 2d ed. (New Providence: Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., 2013): At 439.