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.
323 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11654474)
1. Statutory prohibitions and the regulation of new reproductive technologies under federal law in Canada. Healy P McGill Law J; 1995 Aug; 40(4):905-46. PubMed ID: 11654474 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Judicial intervention in pregnancy. Martin S; Coleman M McGill Law J; 1995 Aug; 40(4):947-91. PubMed ID: 11654475 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. New reproductive technologies in Canada and the United States: same problems, different discourses. Young AH Temple Int Comp Law J; 1998; 12(1):43-85. PubMed ID: 11660812 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The Morgentaler decision: Parliament's options. Hovius B Can Fam Law Q; 1988; 3():137-65. PubMed ID: 11659378 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Rethinking (m)otherhood: feminist theory and state regulation of pregnancy. Harv Law Rev; 1990 Apr; 103(6):1325-43. PubMed ID: 11656270 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The ethics of babymaking. Sherwin S Hastings Cent Rep; 1995; 25(2):34-7. PubMed ID: 11644700 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Medicolegal implications of constitutional status for the unborn: "ambulatory chalices" or "priorities and aspirations. Tolton C Univ Tor Fac Law Rev; 1988; 47(1):3-57. PubMed ID: 11655976 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Relationship, particularity, and change: reflections on R. v. Morgentaler and feminist approaches to liberty. Lessard H McGill Law J; 1991 Apr; 36(2):263-307. PubMed ID: 11659529 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Power and procreation: state interference in pregnancy. Hanigsberg JE Ottawa Law Rev; 1991; 23(1):35-70. PubMed ID: 11656189 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies: a critique of the final report. Shanner L Ann R Coll Physicians Surg Can; 1994 Mar; 27(2):99-102. PubMed ID: 11659921 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Behaviour alteration, the Law Reform Commission and the courts: an ethical perspective. Kluge EH Dalhous Law J; 1988 Oct; 11(3):864-84. PubMed ID: 11659286 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. A role for law in matters of morality. McTeer MA McGill Law J; 1995 Aug; 40(4):893-903. PubMed ID: 11654473 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The Morgentaler judgment: constitutional rights, legislative intention, and institutional design. Weinrib LE Univ Tor Law J; 1992; 42(1):22-76. PubMed ID: 11656266 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The right to procreate: when rights claims have gone wrong. Shanner L McGill Law J; 1995 Aug; 40(4):823-74. PubMed ID: 11654471 [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. "Even by commonsense morality": Morgentaler, Borowski, and the Constitution of Canada. McConnell ML Can Bar Rev; 1989 Mar; 68(1):765-96. PubMed ID: 11656020 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Regulating women's bodies: the adverse effect of fetal rights theory on childbirth decisions and women of color. Krauss DJ Harv Civ Rights-Civil Lib Law Rev; 1991; 26(2):523-47. PubMed ID: 11652068 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]