Changes

Specifically, Blackmun argued that the right to terminate a pregnancy is in the penumbra of privacy rights protected by [[substantive due process]], since pregnancy can occasion life-changing events for women, changes not to be taken lightly.  However, he noted that the woman's interest in her own privacy is counterbalanced, obviously, by the fetus' interest in life, and the state's interest in protecting life.  The question, then, is when each interest trumps the other, and what that means at law.  Blackmun set up this framework specifically:

Specifically, Blackmun argued that the right to terminate a pregnancy is in the penumbra of privacy rights protected by [[substantive due process]], since pregnancy can occasion life-changing events for women, changes not to be taken lightly.  However, he noted that the woman's interest in her own privacy is counterbalanced, obviously, by the fetus' interest in life, and the state's interest in protecting life.  The question, then, is when each interest trumps the other, and what that means at law.  Blackmun set up this framework specifically:

#In the first trimester, the right of the fetus is negligible. The mother can get an abortion at any time and for any reason, provided that a physician is willing to do it. No significant regulation can be required.

::”(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician.

#In the second trimester, the right of the fetus is negligible. The mother can get an abortion at any time and for any reason, provided that a physician is willing to do it. No significant regulation can be required.

 

#In the third trimester, the right of the fetus is negligible. The mother can get an abortion at any time and for any reason, provided that a physician is willing to do it. No significant regulation can be required.

::(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.

 

::(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation  of the life or health of the mother. “<ref> Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 165 (U.S. 1973)</ref>

 

All state regulations of late-term abortions have since been found unconstitutional. Recently the federal Partial Birth Abortion Act (upheld in [[Gonzales v. Carhart]]) approved a ban on a particular kind of late-term abortion procedure. This was the first significant abortion regulation that the Supreme Court has allowed since Roe v Wade.

All state regulations of late-term abortions have since been found unconstitutional. Recently the federal Partial Birth Abortion Act (upheld in [[Gonzales v. Carhart]]) approved a ban on a particular kind of late-term abortion procedure. This was the first significant abortion regulation that the Supreme Court has allowed since Roe v Wade.