Abstract
The Utah husband notification statute unduly burdens a woman's right to decisional privacy regarding her abortion. The requirement of notification may undermine the confidential nature of the doctor/patient relationship, cause anxiety and stress or delay the abortion, which may result in emotional and physical damage. Notification also may give the husband a veto power or result in severe physical injury to the woman. The state interests articulated in the text of the statute and in litigation regarding the statute include aiding the physician to use her or his best medical judgment, encouraging marital communication, promoting the husband's interest in the life of the fetus and promoting the husband's interest in the procreative potential of the marriage. These state interests are not compelling in this context and cannot override a woman's constitutional right to decisional privacy. Even if the state's interests are deemed compelling, the statute does not narrowly promote those interests. The statute can be narrowed, however, to further the legitimate compelling interests of the state without offending the Constitution. This may be accomplished by applying the recommendations suggested. Otherwise, the statute should be held unconstitutional.
Recommended Citation
Pierce, Martha
(1986)
"Husband Notification for Abortion in Utah: A
Patronizing Problem,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 1986:
No.
3, Article 10.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol1986/iss3/10