Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This note examines informed consent laws in abortion, highlighting ethical implications on patient autonomy.
Pre-abortion counseling laws—often framed as informed consent requirements—remain widespread even as the legal landscape surrounding abortion has shifted dramatically following the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. These laws, which mandate that pregnant patients receive specific information prior to obtaining an abortion, frequently disseminate biased, inaccurate, or medically unnecessary content designed to dissuade patients from choosing abortion. This Note argues that such laws undermine medical ethics and impede a patient’s decisional autonomy. It begins by examining the current state of pre-abortion counseling laws in a post-Dobbs world. It then explores the intersection of informed consent and the fiduciary duty concept in a doctor-patient relationship. The Note concludes by proposing an ethical fiduciary theory for pre-abortion counseling laws. Through this lens, pre-abortion counseling laws can be reformed to promote ethical medical practice and protect the autonomy of those seeking abortion care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maria Battaglia (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: