Akron contends that the purpose of § 1870.16 is simply " `to preclude the mindless dumping of aborted fetuses onto garbage piles.'"

Further, it is possible that even a nonvague fetal disposal statute could be struck down if it required state interference with the disposal process that would burden or otherwise chill a woman's constitutionally protected decision to terminate her pregnancy

Where minors' rights have been held subject to curtailment by the state in excess of that permissible in the case of adults it has been because some peculiar state interest existed in the regulation and protection of children, not because the rights themselves are of some inferior kind.

The Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act defined "viable" to mean "the capability of a fetus to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid."

Many of the provisions of that Act, such as those requiring spousal or parental consent to an abortion, banning advertising of abortion procedures, and enacting a vague criminal standard governing abortions at "viability," were held unconstitutional.

The Court recognizes that "the state in the constitutional exercise of its police power may provide for the disposition of dead fetuses to protect the public health."

After extensive litigation, various provisions of the 1974 statute were ruled unconstitutional, including those relating to spousal or parental consent, to the choice of procedure for a postviability abortion, and to the proscription of abortion advertisements.

The Court in Fitzpatrick had approved the requiring of information on the "detrimental physical and psychological effects of abortion

The resulting judgment declared the Act to be severable, upheld certain of its provisions, and held other provisions unconstitutional.

A number of recent court decisions have invalidaited statutorily-iimposed spou. sal consent iprov, isions iin the area of abortion.