137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11652069)
1. Fetal protection: law, ethics and corporate policy.
Sprotzer I; Goldberg IV
J Bus Ethics; 1992 Oct; 11(10):731-5. PubMed ID: 11652069
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Fetal protection policies in the workplace: continuing controversy in light of Johnson Controls.
Blank R
Politics Life Sci; 1992 Aug; 11(2):215-29. PubMed ID: 11659520
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Fetal protection and freedom of contract.
Paul EF
Public Aff Q; 1992 Jul; 6(3):305-26. PubMed ID: 11652079
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. International Union, UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc.
U.S. Supreme Court
Wests Supreme Court Report; 1991 Mar; 111():1196-217. PubMed ID: 12041279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Women's job rights collide with fears of birth defects.
Kilborn PT
N Y Times Web; 1990 Sep; ():1, 28. PubMed ID: 11646784
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Getting beyond discrimination: a regulatory solution to the problem of fetal hazards in the workplace.
Buss E
Yale Law J; 1986 Jan; 95(3):577-98. PubMed ID: 11658700
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. From spiritual descriptions to legal prescriptions: religious imagery of women as "fetal container" in the law.
Peach LJ
J Law Relig; 1993-1994; 10(1):73-93. PubMed ID: 11656314
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. From the workplace to the delivery room: protecting the fetus in the post-Roe era.
Maschke KJ
Politics Life Sci; 1993 Feb; 12(1):53-60. PubMed ID: 11656400
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. UAW v. Johnson Controls: gender discrimination in the fetotoxic workplace.
Brown JW
Rutgers Law Rev; 1992; 44(2):479-529. PubMed ID: 11651453
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Firing the woman to protect the fetus: the reconciliation of fetal protection with employment opportunity goals under Title VII.
Williams WW
Georgetown Law J; 1981 Feb; 69(3):641-704. PubMed ID: 11649426
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Fetal exclusion policies and gendered constructions of suitable work.
Draper E
Soc Probl; 1993 Feb; 40(1):90-107. PubMed ID: 11652221
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. International Union, UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
Fed Report; 1989 Sep; 886():871-921. PubMed ID: 11648148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Court voids limits to women in jobs on basis of fetus.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1991 Mar; ():A1, B12. PubMed ID: 11646829
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The toxic workplace: Title VII protection for the potentially pregnant person.
Andrade VM
Harv Womens Law J; 1981; 4(1):71-105. PubMed ID: 11649449
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Shared interests: promoting healthy births without sacrificing women's liberty.
Johnsen D
Hastings Law J; 1992 Mar; 43(3):569-614. PubMed ID: 11652106
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Protecting the baby: work in pregnancy poses legal frontier.
Lewin T
N Y Times Web; 1988 Aug; ():A1, A15. PubMed ID: 11646717
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The fetus and the law--whose life is it anyway?
Gallagher J
Ms; 1984 Sep; 13(3):62, 64, 66+. PubMed ID: 11655606
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Can employers exclude women to protect children?
Becker ME
JAMA; 1990 Oct 24-31; 264(16):2113-7. PubMed ID: 2214080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers v. American Cyanamid Co.
U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Fed Report; 1984 Aug; 741():444-50. PubMed ID: 11648145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Johnson Controls, Inc. v. California Fair Employment and Housing Commission.
California. Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3
Wests Calif Report; 1990 Feb; 267():158-78. PubMed ID: 11648150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]