These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10231999)
1. Karlin v. Foust United States District Court western District of Wisconsin June 19, 1997. Bostrom B Issues Law Med; 1999; 14(4):377-88. PubMed ID: 10231999 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Report of Peter R. Uhlenberg, Ph D. Uhlenberg PR Issues Law Med; 1999; 14(4):391-423. PubMed ID: 10232000 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Report of Anne C. Speckhard, Ph.D. Speckhard AC Issues Law Med; 1999; 14(4):453-63. PubMed ID: 10232004 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Report of Sandra Mahkorn, M.D., M.P.H., M.S. Mahkorn S Issues Law Med; 1999; 14(4):433-41. PubMed ID: 10232002 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Report of John G. Gianopoulos. Gianopoulos JG Issues Law Med; 1999; 14(4):425-32. PubMed ID: 10232001 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. How the doctor got gagged. The disintegrating right of privacy in the physician-patient relationship. Sugarman J; Powers M JAMA; 1991 Dec; 266(23):3323-7. PubMed ID: 1960832 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Karlin v. Foust. U.S. District Court, W.D. Wisconsin Fed Suppl; 1997 Oct; 975():1177-235. PubMed ID: 11648430 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Karlin v. Foust. U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit Wests Fed Rep; 1999 Aug; 188():446-500. PubMed ID: 11890144 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Informed consent and the First Amendment. Mariner WK; Annas GJ N Engl J Med; 2015 Apr; 372(14):1285-7. PubMed ID: 25830420 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The Chastity Act: government manipulation of abortion information and the First Amendment. Benshoof J Harv Law Rev; 1988 Jun; 101(8):1916-37. PubMed ID: 10288540 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Planned Parenthood v. Casey: the current state of abortion law. Berlin SI Second Opin; 1993 Jan; 18(3):104-9. PubMed ID: 11645221 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Consti-tortion: tort law as an end-run around abortion rights after Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Stone AJ Am Univ J Gend Soc Policy Law; 2000; 8(2):471-515. PubMed ID: 16594110 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Abortion and the consideration of fundamental, irreconcilable interests. Jones CJ Syracuse Law Rev; 1982; 33(2):565-613. PubMed ID: 11658668 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey: the reaffirmation of Roe or the beginning of the end? Henry KS Univ Louisv J Fam Law; 1993-1994 Winter; 32(1):93-113. PubMed ID: 11660011 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. South Dakota's abortion script--threatening the physician-patient relationship. Lazzarini Z N Engl J Med; 2008 Nov; 359(21):2189-91. PubMed ID: 19020321 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Two ships passing in the night: an interpretavist review of the White-Stevens colloquy on Roe v. Wade. Horan DJ; Forsythe CD; Grant ER St Louis Univ Public Law Rev; 1987; 6(2):229-311. PubMed ID: 16086461 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. How the doctor got gagged. Archer WR JAMA; 1992 Jul; 268(1):50; author reply 51. PubMed ID: 1608105 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The economic impact of state restrictions on abortion: parental consent and notification laws and Medicaid funding restrictions. Haas-Wilson D J Policy Anal Manage; 1993; 12(3):498-511. PubMed ID: 10127357 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Rust v Sullivan: legal issues and ethical concerns. Spielman B Womens Health Issues; 1991; 1(4):172-6. PubMed ID: 1822812 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]