Evidence Library

Showing 10 of 25 results.
Scott Burris, JD •
Center for Public Health Law Research
Adrienne Ghorashi, Esq. •
Center for Public Health Law Research
Lindsay Cloud, Esq •
Center for Public Health Law Research
Rachel Rebouché, JD •
Center for Public Health Law Research
Patty Skuster, JD, MPP •
CPHLR Fellow
Antonella Lavelanet •

The Identifying Data for the Empirical Assessment of Law (IDEAL) method, developed by a team of academics, lawyers, reproductive health experts and law students, follows three steps to support the development of evidence-based guidelines and practice related to abortion law. The process identifies social science and epidemiological evidence that does not explicitly address the law, but can nonetheless enhance the understanding of legal effects and identify research gaps and priority research topics.

 
Adrienne Ghorashi, Esq. •
Center for Public Health Law Research

As long as the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for mifepristone remain in place, it creates an unnecessary barrier to access safe medication for abortion and miscarriage care. This article discusses why it’s critical to permanently remove the REMS to reduce the disproportionate harms of abortion restrictions on communities of color, and advance equity in and access to timely and essential reproductive health care.

 
Patty Skuster, JD, MPP •
CPHLR Fellow
Staff •
Center for Public Health Law Research

Self-managed abortion has improved access to safe and effective abortions. While the practice is on the rise around the world, many countries impose significant legal restrictions on abortion access. These laws regulate various aspects of abortion, including: the grounds upon which individuals are permitted to obtain an abortion; who may provide an abortion; the tests that health professionals are required to administer before an abortion may be provided; and where an abortion is legally permitted to take place.

 
Nadia Sawicki, JD, MBe •
Loyola University Chicago School of Law

This legal map identifies the procedural protections established by laws and regulations in all 50 states and the District of Columbia that protect the conscience rights of health care providers in the context of reproductive health care services, with a particular emphasis on immunity from civil liability and limitations on provider rights in cases where patients are likely to be harmed. It captures the relevant features of laws in effect as of December 2019.

 

Pages