12/29/2005 - Jan. 4th Teleconference for Reproductive Health Rights Groups
12/16/05 - FDA Court Date Rescheduled
12/13/05 - Center Study Exposes Government Neglect Of Women’s Health In East And Southeast Asia
12/8/05 -Launch of Women of the World East and Southeast Asia
11/29/05 - Statement on Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England
11/18/05 - Supreme Court Should Not Review Federal Abortion Ban Case, Center’s Brief Argues
11/17/05 - Victory for Reproductive Rights in Peru
11/14/05 - GAO's Report on FDA's Plan B Decision Process Confirms Center's Lawsuit
10/31/05 - Judge Alito’s Nomination is Deeply Troubling, Says Center for Reproductive Rights
10/12/05 - Center Files Friend-of-the-Court Brief
9/27/05 - Brief Against Supreme Court Review of Federal Abortion Ban Case
9/15/05 - Missouri Law Shuts Down Only Abortion Clinic in Southwest Missouri
9/15/05 - Federal Court Strikes Michigan Abortion Ban for Third Time
9/08/05 - Kansas
9/05/05 - Roberts' Nomination to Chief Justice
9/05/05 - Passing of Chief Justice Rehnquist
9/01/05 - 8 Questions Senators Must Ask Roberts
8/26/05 - Shame On the FDA: More Deception and Delay
8/9/05 - Leading Reproductive & Women’s Rights Organization Hold Press Conference
8/05/05 - Politics of Pataki Veto Highlight Need For FDA Action
7/19/05 - Center for Reproductive Rights Alarmed by Roberts Nomination
8/03/05 - When Voters Learn of Roberts’ Record, Support Plummets According to Focus Groups
7/14/05 - For First Time in NCLR’s History, Briefing on Reproductive Rights of Hispanic Women to be Held at Annual Conference
7/8/05 - Key Victory In Appeals Court Against 2003 Federal Abortion Ban
7/6/05 - To Protect Future Generations, Senate Must Require Full and Open Disclosure of Supreme Court Nominee’s Views, Constitutional Litigators Say
7/01/05 - Justice Sandra Day O’Connor Retires: Dramatic Change in Supreme Court Puts Reproductive Rights at Risk
6/23/05 - Law Endangering Young Women Challenged in Federal Court: Health Care Providers Say Law Imperils Health and Lives of Florida’s Young Women
6/23/05 - The Benefits of Roe v. Wade Are Clear: Center for Reproductive Rights’ Response to Senate Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing on Roe
6/20/05 - Civil Rights Chief from U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York Joins Center
6/14/05 - Groups Ask Court to Block Abortion Ban: Leading Reproductive Health and Rights Groups Say Michigan Law Would Prohibit Virtually All Abortions in the State
6/2/05 - Court Stops Virginia’s Third Attempt to 6/2/05 - Outlaw Safe Abortions
6/1/05 - Court Strikes Down Mississippi Abortion Law: Women in State Narrowly Escape Virtual Ban on Second Trimester Abortion
5/19/05 - Tulsa Clinic Challenges Teen Abortion Act as it Hits Governor’s Desk
5/12/05 - The FDA Under Evangelical Influence on Plan B Decision? No Surprise There
4/27/05 - Teen Endangerment Act: Putting Politics Before Teens’ Well-Being
4/13/05 - FDA Commissioner Crawford, No More Stalling!
4/12/05 - U.S. Government’s Appeal in Federal Abortion Ban Case Heads to Court for the First Time
4/10/05 - Alaska Supreme Court to Review Injunction on State’s Teen Abortion Law
3/23/05 - Yet Another Excuse from the FDA on Delaying Plan B Decision
3/15/05 - Statement on the Teen Endangerment Act
3/14/05 - Michigan Abortion Ban Put on Hold While Challenge Proceeds
3/10/05 - Responding to India Supreme Court Decision on Country’s Sterilization Practices
3/4/05 - As World Eases Restrictions on Abortion, U.S. Becomes More Restrictive, Study Finds
3/2/05 - What’s Missing from the Beijing Platform?
3/1/05 - Women’s Health Care Providers Challenge Michigan Law Banning Virtually All Abortions
2/14/05 - Center for Reproductive Rights Appoints New Director of International Legal Program
1/21/05 - Center Sues FDA for denying Women Over-the-Counter Access to Emergency Contraception
1/21/05 - Statement from the Center for Reproductive Rights on the 32nd Anniversary of Roe v. Wade
1/05/05 - Alberto Gonzales: Three Questions the Attorney General Nominee Must Address
print this page | email this page | join mailing list
Tulsa Clinic Challenges Teen Abortion Act as it Hits Governor’s Desk
Learn More

Today, the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, challenging teen abortion legislation that fails to protect the most vulnerable adolescents in the state. The act, set to go into effect as soon as Governor Brad Henry signs it into law, requires physicians to notify a parent or legal guardian at least 48 hours before a woman under 18 years old receives an abortion.

But authors of the bill neglected to provide sufficient protections for those teens who cannot involve a parent. For example, a teen who comes from a home where physical or emotional abuse is prevalent can seek court authorization for an abortion, but could be forced to wait indefinitely for a court decision. The legislation harms adolescents who cannot turn to a parent and therefore, must turn to the courts by subjecting them to potential delays that put their health at risk or even prevent them from obtaining an abortion at all.

"This law speaks volumes about the priorities of the Oklahoma legislature and governor. These politicians would sooner turn their backs on the most vulnerable teens by passing a bill limiting their access to abortion than pass legislation that actually protects their health," said Nancy Northup, President of the Center for Reproductive Rights.

The Center filed the lawsuit on behalf of a Tulsa clinic, Nova Health Systems, dba Reproductive Services, arguing that the legislation is unconstitutional and its enforcement could result in irreparable harm to Reproductive Services’ patients.

"Our client, Reproductive Services, already strongly encourages all of its young patients to involve a parent before having an abortion—and in fact, most of them do. This legislation treats the patients who cannot safely rely on their parents unfairly and unlawfully," said Bebe Anderson, staff attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights.

As the lawsuit outlines, the Supreme Court has emphasized that "time is of particular significance" in court authorization procedures for minors. Typically, teenagers wait longer than adult women to obtain abortions. Often they are unable to recognize that they are pregnant due to irregular menstrual periods or they have difficulty raising the money for the surgery. Although abortion is one of the safest surgical procedures, these delays increase the operation’s medical risks.

The Center for Reproductive Rights is also challenging Oklahoma’s 2001 parental consent law on behalf of Reproductive Services. A federal court struck that law down as unconstitutional in 2002, but the case is currently in the appeals process. The new legislation introduces additional requirements for minors seeking an abortion, including a mandatory 48-hour delay; the suit challenges only the parental notification provisions.

The plaintiff in the case is represented by attorneys Bebe Anderson and Galen Sherwin of the Center for Reproductive Rights, and M.M. Hardwick of Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Learn more about the Center's work with adolescents’ reproductive rights.