The Use of Public Health Evidence in Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt

dc.creatorGrossman, D.
dc.date.accessioned2018-04-03T16:24:18Z
dc.date.available2018-04-03T16:24:18Z
dc.date.issued2016-11-07
dc.description.abstract[This piece, written for the JAMA Internal Medicine "Viewpoints" section, discusses the impacts of House Bill 2, as documented by TxPEP research, and the use of research-based evidence in Whole Woman's Health v Hellerstedt.] The Supreme Court decision in the Whole Woman’s Health case provides a clearer judicial standard related to undue burden on women seeking abortion. The Court said laws restricting abortion cannot be considered in the abstract—or just because a legislature says they would be beneficial. Instead, courts must compare the benefit the law is likely to provide with the burden the law will impose on women. The Court’s decision shows that evidence matters, which hopefully heralds a new emphasis on data-driven policies for reproductive healthen_US
dc.description.departmentPopulation Research Centeren_US
dc.identifierdoi:10.15781/T2K06XH9V
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2152/64151
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofTxPEP Publicationsen_US
dc.rights.restrictionOpenen_US
dc.subjectinternal medicineen_US
dc.subjectsupreme courten_US
dc.subjectwoman's healthen_US
dc.subjectGrossmanen_US
dc.titleThe Use of Public Health Evidence in Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Access full-text files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Grossman-Use-of-Public-Health-Evidence-JAMA-Int.-Med-2016.pdf
Size:
50.88 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.66 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: