296 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11661992)
1. Prenatal exposure to fetally toxic work environments: the dilemma of the 1978 Pregnancy Amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Furnish HA
Iowa Law Rev; 1980 Oct; 66(1):63-129. PubMed ID: 11661992
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Firing the woman to protect the fetus: the reconciliation of fetal protection with employment opportunity goals under Title VII.
Williams WW
Georgetown Law J; 1981 Feb; 69(3):641-704. PubMed ID: 11649426
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The toxic workplace: Title VII protection for the potentially pregnant person.
Andrade VM
Harv Womens Law J; 1981; 4(1):71-105. PubMed ID: 11649449
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Biological monitoring: the employer's dilemma.
Miller FH
Am J Law Med; 1984; 9(4):388-426. PubMed ID: 11644166
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Getting beyond discrimination: a regulatory solution to the problem of fetal hazards in the workplace.
Buss E
Yale Law J; 1986 Jan; 95(3):577-98. PubMed ID: 11658700
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Fetal protection programs under Title VII--rebutting the procreation assumption.
Blanco AC
Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 1985; 46(3):755-94. PubMed ID: 11649206
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Fetal protection and freedom of contract.
Paul EF
Public Aff Q; 1992 Jul; 6(3):305-26. PubMed ID: 11652079
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Fetal exclusion policies and gendered constructions of suitable work.
Draper E
Soc Probl; 1993 Feb; 40(1):90-107. PubMed ID: 11652221
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Birth defects caused by parental exposure to workplace hazards: the interface of Title VII with OSHA and tort law.
Darcy L
Univ Mich J Law Reform; 1979; 12(2):237-60. PubMed ID: 11665121
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Employment discrimination implications of genetic screening in the workplace under Title VII and the Rehabilitation Act.
Canter EF
Am J Law Med; 1984; 10(3):323-47. PubMed ID: 6534190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Protecting the baby: work in pregnancy poses legal frontier.
Lewin T
N Y Times Web; 1988 Aug; ():A1, A15. PubMed ID: 11646717
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Amendment No. 336.
Bartlett DF
Congr Rec (Dly Ed); 1975 Apr; 121(55):S5708-30. PubMed ID: 11663619
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Fetal protection policies in the workplace: continuing controversy in light of Johnson Controls.
Blank R
Politics Life Sci; 1992 Aug; 11(2):215-29. PubMed ID: 11659520
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Pregnant substance abusers: a problem that won't go away.
Swenson VJ; Crabbe C
St Marys Law J; 1994; 25(2):623-73. PubMed ID: 11652732
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Off the pedestal and into the arena: toward including women in experimental protocols.
Gorenberg H; White A
Rev Law Soc Change; 1991-1992; 19(1):205-46. PubMed ID: 11659599
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Disability discrimination in the health care workplace.
Benesch K
Trends Health Care Law Ethics; 1994; 9(3):45-8. PubMed ID: 11652976
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. UAW v. Johnson Controls: gender discrimination in the fetotoxic workplace.
Brown JW
Rutgers Law Rev; 1992; 44(2):479-529. PubMed ID: 11651453
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The invisible woman: gender bias in medical research.
Keville TD
Womens Rights Law Report; 1994; 15():123-42. PubMed ID: 11660409
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Live birth: a condition precedent to recognition of rights.
Crockett KG; Hyman M
Hofstra Law Rev; 1976; 4(3):805-36. PubMed ID: 11664599
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
