402 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11656019)
1. Abortion, personhood, and privacy in Texas.
Johnson A
Tex Law Rev; 1990 Jun; 68(7):1521-44. PubMed ID: 11656019
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The creation of fetal rights: conflicts with women's constitutional rights to liberty, privacy, and equal protection.
Johnsen DE
Yale Law J; 1986 Jan; 95(3):599-625. PubMed ID: 11658701
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. To be or not to be: protecting the unborn's potentiality of life.
Parness JA; Pritchard SK
Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1982; 51(2):257-98. PubMed ID: 11658559
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Fetal rights? It depends.
Doudera AE
Trial; 1982 Apr; 18(4):38-44, 74-76. PubMed ID: 11649512
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The legal status of the unborn after Webster.
Parness JA
Dickinson Law Rev; 1990; 95(1):1-22. PubMed ID: 11659394
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Roe v. Wade and the traditional legal standards concerning pregnancy.
Hopkin WR
Temple Law Q; 1974; 47(4):715-38. PubMed ID: 11664349
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The social construction of personhood.
Burkhart J
Soc Thought; 1989; 15():2-13. PubMed ID: 11659411
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Current technology affecting Supreme Court abortion jurisprudence.
Buckley M
NY Law Sch Law Rev; 1982; 27(4):1221-60. PubMed ID: 11651778
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The right to begin life with sound body and mind: fetal patients and conflicts with their mothers.
Dougherty CJ
Univ Detroit Law Rev; 1985; 63(1-2):89-117. PubMed ID: 11659281
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Reexamining Roe: nineteenth-century abortion statutes and the Fourteenth Amendment.
Witherspoon JS
St Marys Law J; 1985; 17(1):29-71. PubMed ID: 11655872
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Injuries to unborn children.
Cane PF
Aust Law J; 1977 Oct; 51(10):704-20. PubMed ID: 11665004
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Impact of the abortion decisions upon the father's role.
Witherspoon JP
Jurist; 1975; 35(1):32-65. PubMed ID: 11664577
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. A decision-theoretic reconstruction of Roe v. Wade.
Lockhart T
Public Aff Q; 1991 Jul; 5(3):243-58. PubMed ID: 11656064
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The fetus under Section 1983: still struggling for recognition.
Czepiga PT
Syracuse Law Rev; 1983; 34(4):1029-65. PubMed ID: 11655745
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Prenatal caretaking: limits of state intervention with and without Roe.
Rush SE
Univ Fla Law Rev; 1987; 39(1):55-112. PubMed ID: 11658954
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The beginnings of personhood: legal considerations.
Taubenfeld HJ
Perkins J; 1973; 27(1):16-9. PubMed ID: 11660984
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Prosecution of mothers of drug-exposed babies: constitutional and criminal theory.
McGinnis DM
Univ PA Law Rev; 1990 Dec; 139(2):505-39. PubMed ID: 11651407
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Haunting shadows from the rubble of Roe's right of privacy.
Haley JN
Suffolk Univ Law Rev; 1974; 9(1):145-84. PubMed ID: 11664401
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The politics of abortion.
Gearty C
J Law Soc; 1992; 19(4):441-53. PubMed ID: 11656230
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
