Lawsuit Filed In Massachusetts To Prevent Relocation Of Women's Health Clinic

Main Category: Abortion
Also Included In: Litigation / Medical Malpractice;  Public Health;  Women's Health / Gynecology
Article Date: 19 Aug 2009 - 2:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   view / write opinions

Residents and business owners in Brookline, Mass., have filed a lawsuit in an effort to stop Women's Health Services, a gynecological clinic that provides abortion services, from receiving an occupancy permit to relocate to the town, the Boston Globe reports. The lawsuit was filed on July 31 in Norfolk Superior Court on behalf of eight plaintiffs -- residents living in the vicinity of the proposed location, the director of a nearby preschool and local business owners. The lawsuit includes Brookline Building Commissioner Michael Shepard as a defendant.

According to the Globe, the plaintiffs are appealing a May decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals, which granted approval to Women's Health Services to renovate the building and move in. They also are asking a judge to stop Shepard from issuing the occupancy permit before the case has been resolved. In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs say that disruptions to the schools and businesses will increase when antiabortion-rights protesters descend on the area when the clinic relocates.

Documents filed on the plaintiffs' behalf state that the protesters frightened and disturbed some of the "approximately 900 children" who use the area's schools, sidewalks and parks when they protested the Zoning Board's decision last spring. The lawsuit cited the protesters' use of graphic signs and costumes, as well as the potential obstruction to motorists and pedestrians.

Jennifer Dopazo, Brookline's town counsel, said that it could take up two years for the court to make a decision on the plaintiffs' request. A hearing on the requested injunction likely will occur sooner, according to Dopazo. She said that the board conducted a thorough review of the clinic's application, which cited a concern about parking for its patients. In an Aug. 7 interview, Dopazo said, "This permit needed review strictly due to parking issues," adding, "The zoning for medical use of the building was already there, it was an as-of-right use, prior. The board took into consideration issues of parking, and those are the factors it looked at." She noted that the clinic can proceed on renovations of the new facility, at its own risk, pending occupancy permit and lawsuit.

Laurent Delli-Bovi, a physician and owner of Women's Health Services, was unavailable for comment, according to the Globe. Bill Zucker, a lawyer for the clinic, said that although renovation work has not yet commenced, "there is nothing to prevent the clinic from going forward" with the renovations. He said that the lawsuit was filed in "bad faith" and dismissed it as "frivolous" and with "no merit." Zucker said, "The appeal itself, from our perspective, is about only one thing: publicity."

Thomas May, the plaintiffs' attorney, said that Zucker's characterization of the lawsuit is "flat-out wrong" and added that the appeal is based on zoning issues. Andrea Miller, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts, said the group has been in contact with Women's Health Services officials and community supporters since the lawsuit was filed. Miller said, "This lawsuit, we fear, could bolster the views of those who oppose women's right to choose," adding, "We continue to monitor the situation" (O'Brien, Boston Globe, 8/16).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.