148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11652937)
1. The rights and wrongs of Norplant offers.
Berman DA
South Calif Rev Law Womens Stud; 1993; 3(1):1-18. PubMed ID: 11652937
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Norplant: the new scarlet letter?
Flannery MT
J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1992; 8():201-26. PubMed ID: 11645739
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The constitutionality of the use of the Norplant contraceptive device as a condition of probation.
Burke M
Hastings Constit Law Q; 1992; 20(1):207-46. PubMed ID: 11652186
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Norplant meets the new eugenicists: the impermissibility of coerced contraception.
Mertus J; Heller S
St Louis Univ Public Law Rev; 1992; 11(2):359-83. PubMed ID: 11652703
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Norplant use in conjunction with the welfare system.
Funk AM
South Calif Interdiscip Law J; 1993; 2(1):147-63. PubMed ID: 11652714
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The Norplant debate: birth control or woman control?
Spitz SS
Columbia Human Rights Law Rev; 1993; 25(1):131-69. PubMed ID: 11652335
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Norplant bonuses and the unconstitutional conditions doctrine.
Coale DS
Tex Law Rev; 1992 Nov; 71(1):189-215. PubMed ID: 11656313
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Womb for rent: Norplant and the undoing of poor women.
Vance JL
Hastings Constit Law Q; 1994; 21(3):827-55. PubMed ID: 11863029
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The Norplant condition: protecting the unborn or violating fundamental rights?
Persels J
J Leg Med; 1992 Jun; 13(2):237-62. PubMed ID: 11643010
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Should the government buy "good behavior".
Pressner SJ
Responsive Community; 1991-1992 Winter; 2(1):75-8. PubMed ID: 11653064
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Litigation, legislation, and limelight: obstacles to commercial surrogate mother arrangements.
Tiller SL
Iowa Law Rev; 1987 Jan; 72(2):415-44. PubMed ID: 11658963
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The creation and perpetuation of the mother/body myth: judicial and legislative enlistment of Norplant.
Henley M
Buffalo Law Rev; 1993; 41(2):703-77. PubMed ID: 11659736
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The Norplant prescription: birth control, women control, or crime control?
Arthur SL
UCLA Law Rev; 1992 Oct; 40(1):1-101. PubMed ID: 11652185
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The Norplant debate.
Kantrowitz B; Wingert P
Newsweek; 1993 Feb; 121(7):37, 40-41. PubMed ID: 11654022
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The social meaning of the Norplant condition: constitutional considerations of race, class, and gender.
Albiston C
Berkeley Womens Law J; 1994; 9():9-57. PubMed ID: 16767841
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. National population policy: a statement of the government of India.
Singh K
Popul Dev Rev; 1976 Jun; 2(2):309-12. PubMed ID: 11663276
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The implantation of rights: an argument for unconditionally funded Norplant removal.
Arnow RS
Berkeley Womens Law J; 1996; 11():19-48. PubMed ID: 11657484
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Special report... Norplant -- one year later.
Wash Memo Alan Guttmacher Inst; 1991 Dec; (20):1, 3. PubMed ID: 12343466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Fertility policy and implementation in China, 1986-88.
Hardee-Cleaveland K; Banister J
Popul Dev Rev; 1988 Jun; 14(2):245-86. PubMed ID: 11651940
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The Norplant condition: one step forward or two steps back?
Ballard T
Harv Womens Law J; 1993; 16():139-87. PubMed ID: 11652871
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
