516 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11659979)
1. Toward a First Amendment theory of doctor-patient discourse and the right to receive unbiased medical advice.
Berg P
Boston Univ Law Rev; 1994 Mar; 74(2):201-66. PubMed ID: 11659979
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Informed consent to abortion: a refinement.
Jipping TL
Case West Reserve Law Rev; 1987-1988 Winter; 38(3):329-86. PubMed ID: 11659038
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Abortion's shrinking majority.
Murphy J
Time; 1986 Jun; 127(25):30-1. PubMed ID: 11645638
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Rust v. Sullivan: triumph of the right over reason.
Call EC
J Fam Law; 1992-1993 Winter; 31(1):123-42. PubMed ID: 11656449
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Informed consent civil actions for post-abortion psychological trauma.
Eller TR
Notre Dame Law Rev; 1996; 71(4):639-70. PubMed ID: 11660407
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The law of choice and choice of law: abortion, the right to travel, and extraterritorial regulation in American federalism.
Kreimer SF
N Y Univ Law Rev; 1992 Jun; 67(3):451-519. PubMed ID: 11656241
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The Supreme Court on abortion funding: the second time around.
Horan DJ; Marzen TJ
St Louis Univ Law J; 1981; 25(2):411-27. PubMed ID: 11655812
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The Pennsylvania abortion case.
Benshoof J
Touro Law Rev; 1993; 9(2):217-49. PubMed ID: 11656382
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Unburdening the undue burden standard: orienting Casey in constitutional jurisprudence.
Metzger GE
Columbia Law Rev; 1994; 94():2025-89. PubMed ID: 11660149
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Why the government is not required to subsidize abortion counseling and referral.
Hirt TC
Harv Law Rev; 1988 Jun; 101():1895-915. PubMed ID: 11655923
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Informed consent and abortion.
Kapp MB
Wis L Rev; 1993; 1993(2):619-23. PubMed ID: 11659680
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The Title X family planning gag rule: can the government buy up constitutional rights?
Chervin CI
Stanford Law Rev; 1989 Jan; 41(2):401-34. PubMed ID: 11655926
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. The discourse ethics alternative to Rust v. Sullivan.
Leedes GC
Univ Richmond Law Rev; 1991; 26(1):87-143. PubMed ID: 11659547
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The Title X family planning subsidies: the government's role in moral issues.
Reitler EG
Harvard J Legis; 1990; 27(2):453-95. PubMed ID: 11656070
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Doctors, patients and the Constitution: a theoretical analysis of the physician's role in "private" reproductive decisions.
Appleton SF
Wash Univ Law Q; 1985; 63(2):183-236. PubMed ID: 11656658
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. The right to Medicaid payment for abortion.
Butler PA
Hastings Law J; 1977 Mar; 28(4):931-77. PubMed ID: 11663756
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The center holds!
Dworkin R
New York Rev Books; 1992 Aug; 39(14):29-33. PubMed ID: 11656267
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
