320 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11646759)
1. States may require girl to notify parents before having abortion.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1990 Jun; ():A1, A20. PubMed ID: 11646759
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Abortion: a new round.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1989 Nov; ():A1, A24. PubMed ID: 11647875
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The erosion of Roe v. Wade; do minors have any rights?
Sourial WH
Whittier Law Rev; 1992; 13(1):285-332. PubMed ID: 11656215
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Abortion: trouble ahead.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1989 Jul; ():A1, A16. PubMed ID: 11647407
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Abortion rights of young women: the Supreme Court attacks the most vulnerable.
Heller S
Washburn Law J; 1990; 30(1):15-28. PubMed ID: 11659579
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. When is a pregnant minor mature? When is an abortion in her best interests? The Ohio Supreme Court applies Ohio's Abortion Parental Notification Law: In re Jane Doe 1.
Stuhlbarg SF
Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1992; 60(3):907-61. PubMed ID: 11651633
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Where privacy fails: equal protection and the abortion rights of minors.
Schmidt CG
N Y Univ Law Rev; 1993 Jun; 68(3):597-638. PubMed ID: 11659822
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Abortion rights of minors weighed.
Taylor S
N Y Times Web; 1987 Nov; ():B32. PubMed ID: 11647378
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Workability of the undue burden test.
Schneider EA
Temple Law Rev; 1993; 66(3):1003-37. PubMed ID: 11659882
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Akron Center for Reproductive Health v. Rosen.
U.S. District Court, N.D. Ohio, E.D
Fed Suppl; 1986 Apr; 633():1123-45. PubMed ID: 11648374
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Massachusetts parental/judicial consent law for minors' abortions: perspectives on the past, present, and future.
Joseph MA
New Engl Law Rev; 1992; 26(3):1051-99. PubMed ID: 11659665
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Court, in effect, rejects parent notification.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1996 Apr; ():A19. PubMed ID: 11647498
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Reading Casey: structuring the woman's decisionmaking process.
Goldstein RD
William Mary Bill Rights J; 1996; 4(3):787-880. PubMed ID: 11660789
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Hodgson v. Minnesota.
U.S. Supreme Court
Wests Supreme Court Report; 1990 Jun; 110():2926-72. PubMed ID: 12041294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Parental consent to abortion: how enforcement can vary.
Lewin T
N Y Times Web; 1992 May; ():A1, B8. PubMed ID: 11647920
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Envisioning a future for reproductive liberty: strategies for making the rights real.
Pine RN; Law SA
Harv Civ Rights-Civil Lib Law Rev; 1992; 27(2):407-63. PubMed ID: 11656200
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Mediating the polar extremes: a guide to post-Webster abortion policy.
Wilkins RG; Sherlock R; Clark S
Brigh Young Univ Law Rev; 1991; 1991(1):403-87. PubMed ID: 11656173
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Beyond the Roe debate: judicial experience with the 1980's "reasonableness" test.
Farber DA; Nowak JE
Va Law Rev; 1990 Apr; 76(3):519-38. PubMed ID: 11659370
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Oblique clash between 2 Justices mirrors tensions about abortion.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1989 Nov; ():A1, B16. PubMed ID: 11647418
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Justices deadlocked on state laws restricting minors' access to abortion.
Taylor S
N Y Times Web; 1987 Dec; ():B16. PubMed ID: 11646635
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
