194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11648399)
21. Planned Parenthood of Minnesota v. State.
U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Fed Report; 1980 Jan; 612():359-63. PubMed ID: 11648350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. A "prolife" population delegation?
Holden C
Science; 1984 Jun; 224(4655):1321-2. PubMed ID: 11644140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. State of New York v. Sullivan [1 November 1989].
United States. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Annu Rev Popul Law; 1989; 16():13. PubMed ID: 12344096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Rust v. Sullivan: triumph of the right over reason.
Call EC
J Fam Law; 1992-1993 Winter; 31(1):123-42. PubMed ID: 11656449
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Exporting abortion politics: the battle over international family planning assistance.
Lasher C
Conscience; 1991; 12(5):22-3. PubMed ID: 12178849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. American population policy abroad: the Mexico City abortion funding restrictions.
Fox GH
N Y Univ J Int Law Polit; 1986; 18(2):609-62. PubMed ID: 11655815
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Reagan restrictions on foreign aid for abortion programs lead to a fight.
Rasky SF
N Y Times Web; 1984 Oct; ():20. PubMed ID: 11647355
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. The impact of public abortion funding decisions on indigent women: a proposal to reform state statutory and constitutional abortion funding provisions.
Corns CA
Univ Mich J Law Reform; 1991; 24(2):371-403. PubMed ID: 11656224
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Public policy on human reproduction and the historian.
Reed J
J Soc Hist; 1985; 18(3):383-98. PubMed ID: 11650754
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. The Title X family planning gag rule: can the government buy up constitutional rights?
Chervin CI
Stanford Law Rev; 1989 Jan; 41(2):401-34. PubMed ID: 11655926
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. The selective funding problem: abortions and religious schools.
McConnell MW
Harv Law Rev; 1991 Mar; 104(5):989-1050. PubMed ID: 11656068
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. To bear or not to bear: reproductive freedom as an international human right.
Hernández BE
Brooklyn J Int Law; 1991; 17(2):309-58. PubMed ID: 11656131
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Planned Parenthood Federation of America v. Bowen, 25 February 1988.
United States. District Court, District of Colorado
Annu Rev Popul Law; 1988; 15():44. PubMed ID: 12289568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. "Crying stones": a comparison of abortion in Japan and the United States.
Wardle LD
N Y Law Sch J Int Comp Law; 1993; 14(2-3):183-259. PubMed ID: 11659814
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Abortion compromise -- inevitable and impossible.
Law SA
Univ Ill Law Rev; 1992; 25(4):921-41. PubMed ID: 11656296
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Abortion-related issues in the U.S. foreign assistance program.
Mchugh JT
Int Rev; 1988; 12(4):330-9. PubMed ID: 12179687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Fischer v. Department of Public Welfare.
Pennsylvania. Commonwealth Court
Atl Report; 1984 Sep; 482():1148-62. PubMed ID: 11648341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Michigan v. Engler.
U.S. District Court, W.D. Michigan, S.D.
Fed Suppl; 1994 Jul; 860():406-10. PubMed ID: 11648413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. The Supreme Court on abortion funding: the second time around.
Horan DJ; Marzen TJ
St Louis Univ Law J; 1981; 25(2):411-27. PubMed ID: 11655812
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Statutory prohibition on use of appropriated funds in programs where abortion is a method of family planning; standard of compliance for family planning services projects; proposed rules.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Fed Regist; 1987 Sep; 52(169):33210-5. PubMed ID: 11645640
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
