in seeing to it that abortion, like any other medical procedure, is performed under circumstances that insure maximum safety for the patient. This interest obviously extends at least to the performing physician and his staff, to the facilities involved, to the availability of aftercare, and to adequate provi sion for any complication or emergency that might arise. Id. at 150, 93 S.Ct. 705 (emphasis added). Further, Hiedeman notes that Roe held that “[t]he State may define the term ‘physician’ ... to mean only a physician currently licensed by the State, and may proscribe any abortion by a person who is not a physician as so defined.” Id. at 165, 93 S.Ct. 705. Hiedeman further argues that Casey did not disturb this long-standing Supreme Court precedent. 505 U.S. at 856, 112 S.Ct. 2791(<HOLDING>). Hiedeman’s attempt to equate these Supreme
holding that towns franchise regulations violated section 253a because the regulations provided the town with unbounded discretion to pick and choose between providers holding preenforcement challenge to registration requirements for abortion providers justiciable where the regulations  provided for the closing of any abortion service that  would be in violation of any of the board of healths regulations and where the defendants had the power to deny authorization to those seeking to operate an abortion facility as well as the power to order the closing of any facility that it deems not in compliance with its regulations holding that as the court has made clear in several recent decisions a claim that the application of government regulations effects a taking of a property interest is not ripe until the government entity charged with implementing the regulations has reached a final decision regarding the application of the regulations to the property at issue recognizing that the pregnant womans ability to assert her own rights is beset with obstacles including her desire to protect her privacy recognizing the right of the woman to choose to have an abortion before viability and to obtain it without interference from the state but noting that all abortion regulations interfere to some degree with a womans ability to decide whether to terminate her pregnancy thus the constitutionally critical concern is whether the regulations in a real sense deprive  women of the ultimate decision