328 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11658633)
1. Missouri loses latest round in battle over permissible abortion regulations.
Baldwin ML
UMKC Law Rev; 1982; 50(3):320-39. PubMed ID: 11658633
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. The future of abortion.
McDaniel A
Newsweek; 1989 Jul; 114(3):14-21, 24-27. PubMed ID: 11655929
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Abortion--an update.
Guthman HL
Med Trial Tech Q; 1985; 32(2):175-91. PubMed ID: 11649201
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Roe to Casey: a survey of abortion law.
Pirner RK; Williams LB
Washburn Law J; 1993; 32(2):166-89. PubMed ID: 11659798
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Abortion choice and the law in Vermont: a recent study.
Olmstead FH
Vt Law Rev; 1982; 7(2):281-313. PubMed ID: 11655820
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The viability of the trimester approach.
Calder KA
Univ Baltimore Law Rev; 1984; 13(2):322-45. PubMed ID: 11658808
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Privacy II: state attempts to regulate abortion.
Prall S
Annu Surv Am Law; 1988; 1(2):385-427. PubMed ID: 11652657
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Abortions for minors after Bellotti II: an analysis of state law and a proposal.
Lozano GD
St Marys Law J; 1980; 11(4):946-97. PubMed ID: 11658462
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Enforcement of state abortion statutes after Roe: a state-by-state analysis.
Linton PB
Univ Detroit Law Rev; 1990; 67(2):157-259. PubMed ID: 11659261
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Mediating the polar extremes: a guide to post-Webster abortion policy.
Wilkins RG; Sherlock R; Clark S
Brigh Young Univ Law Rev; 1991; 1991(1):403-87. PubMed ID: 11656173
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. S.J. Res. 110: Human Life Federalism Amendment.
Hatch OG
Congr Rec (Dly Ed); 1981 Sep; 127(131):S10194-8. PubMed ID: 11658572
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Abortion regulation: the circumscription of state intervention by the doctrine of informed consent.
Abbot L
Georgia Law Rev; 1981; 15(3):681-713. PubMed ID: 11658321
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Beyond the Roe debate: judicial experience with the 1980's "reasonableness" test.
Farber DA; Nowak JE
Va Law Rev; 1990 Apr; 76(3):519-38. PubMed ID: 11659370
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The erosion of Roe v. Wade; do minors have any rights?
Sourial WH
Whittier Law Rev; 1992; 13(1):285-332. PubMed ID: 11656215
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Rationalizing the abortion debate: legal rhetoric and the abortion controversy.
Chemerinsky E
Buffalo Law Rev; 1982; 31(1):107-64. PubMed ID: 11655711
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. When is a pregnant minor mature? When is an abortion in her best interests? The Ohio Supreme Court applies Ohio's Abortion Parental Notification Law: In re Jane Doe 1.
Stuhlbarg SF
Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1992; 60(3):907-61. PubMed ID: 11651633
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The aftermath of Casey: is a sonogram requirement unduly burdensome?
Trense CF
Law Psychol Rev; 1993; 17():225-41. PubMed ID: 11659925
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
