Mum's the word: the Supreme Court and family planning.
On May 23, 1991, the US Supreme Court upheld federal regulations that prohibit federally funded family planning programs from counseling about or referring for abortion. As a result, government benefits may now entail substantial costs. The regulations changed the nature of government-assisted family planning from comprehensive care and counseling to limited services and government-prescribed information. The reasoning in Rust v Sullivan allows government to limit freedom of speech in federally funded programs. The decision may have been influenced by antiabortion sentiment, but it does not affect the legality of abortion. Instead, it sets a precedent for government control of whether and how health care can be discussed wherever government pays some of the bills.
Mariner
W K
WK
Boston University School of Public Health, MA 02118.
D000029:Abortion, Legal / Q000191:economics; D002961:Civil Rights / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D003219:Confidentiality / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D003376:Counseling / Q000191:economics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005193:Family Planning Services / Q000191:economics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D035082:Federal Government; D033161:Government Regulation; D006801:Humans; D011050:Policy Making; D037841:Pregnant People; D011634:Public Health / Q000191:economics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D035521:Supreme Court Decisions; D014481:United States