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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11654802)

  • 1. Imposing morality: the pediatrician as parental agent.
    Goldblatt AD
    Politics Life Sci; 1996 Sep; 15(2):292-5. PubMed ID: 11654802
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Minors' rights to confidential contraceptive services: the limits of state power.
    Paul EW; Klassel D
    Womens Rights Law Report; 1987; 10(1):45-63. PubMed ID: 11658948
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The Constitution and the anomaly of the pregnant teenager.
    Buchanan E
    Ariz Law Rev; 1982; 24(3):553-610. PubMed ID: 11658425
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Parents' rights vs. minors' rights regarding the provision of contraceptives to teenagers.
    Wardle LD
    Neb Law Rev; 1989; 68(1-2):216-60. PubMed ID: 11659270
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The evolution of the right to privacy after Roe v. Wade.
    Barnard D
    Am J Law Med; 1987; 13(2 3):365-525. PubMed ID: 11659051
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. The role of minors in health care decision making: current legal issues.
    Waxse DJ
    Bioethics Forum; 1995; 11(4):17-21. PubMed ID: 11654286
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. The law of fertility regulation in the United States: a 1980 review.
    Isaacs SL
    J Fam Law; 1980-1981; 19(1):65-96. PubMed ID: 11663114
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Treatment and minors: issues not involving lifesaving treatment.
    King PA
    J Fam Law; 1984-1985; 23(2):241-65. PubMed ID: 11658744
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. H.L. v. Matheson and the right of minors to seek abortions.
    Wolff MH; Hawn RH
    Calif West Law Rev; 1982; 19(1):74-106. PubMed ID: 11658632
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Workability of the undue burden test.
    Schneider EA
    Temple Law Rev; 1993; 66(3):1003-37. PubMed ID: 11659882
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Parental control is not a panacea.
    Rosoff JI
    Politics Life Sci; 1996 Sep; 15(2):310-1. PubMed ID: 11654806
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A decade of cementing the mosaic of Roe v. Wade: is the composite a message to leave abortion alone?
    Kudner KE
    Univ Toledo Law Rev; 1984; 15(2):681-753. PubMed ID: 11649780
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Planned Parenthood v. Casey: the current state of abortion law.
    Berlin SI
    Second Opin; 1993 Jan; 18(3):104-9. PubMed ID: 11645221
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Constitutional law--due process--a state abortion statute that imposes a blanket parental consultation requirement on minors...constitutes a denial of due process.
    Wambeke AM
    J Urban Law; 1980; 57(2):337-63. PubMed ID: 11662839
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Parental notification requirements applicable to projects for family planning services; final rule.
    U.S. Public Health Service
    Fed Regist; 1983 Jan; 48(18):3600-14. PubMed ID: 11645488
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The trimester approach: how long can the legal fiction last?
    Casurella JG; Schrock CT
    Mercer Law Rev; 1984; 35(4):891-913. PubMed ID: 11658750
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Adolescent access to contraception: a rights-based approach.
    Albisa C
    Politics Life Sci; 1996 Sep; 15(2):283-4. PubMed ID: 11654800
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.