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.
338 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11663427)
21. Abortion, conscience and the Constitution: an examination of federal institutional conscience clauses. Pilpel HF; Patton DE Columbia Human Rights Law Rev; 1974 Fall-1975 Winter; 6(2):279-305. PubMed ID: 11663597 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. The future of abortion. McDaniel A Newsweek; 1989 Jul; 114(3):14-21, 24-27. PubMed ID: 11655929 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Inc.: stare decisis prevails, but for how long? Prieto P Univ Miami Law Rev; 1984 Sep; 38(5):921-38. PubMed ID: 11655794 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Technological advances and Roe v. Wade: the need to rethink abortion law. Martyn K UCLA Law Rev; 1982; 29(5-6):1194-215. PubMed ID: 11655743 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Oh my God, I'm pregnant. Minter CV Ohio North Univ Law Rev; 1973; 1(1):119-29. PubMed ID: 11663469 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Justices uphold abortion rights by narrow vote. Taylor S N Y Times Web; 1986 Jun; ():A1, B10-11. PubMed ID: 11647367 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Trimesters and technology: revamping Roe v. Wade. Rhoden NK Yale Law J; 1986 Mar; 95(4):639-97. PubMed ID: 11655828 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. 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]
30. 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]
31. Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton: the compelling state interest test in substantive due process. Gelinas A Wash Lee Law Rev; 1973; 30(3):628-46. PubMed ID: 11663508 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Judicial restraint and the non-decision in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services. Crain CA Harv J Law Public Policy; 1990; 13(1):263-318. PubMed ID: 11649286 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. State limitations upon the availability and accessibility of abortions after Wade and Bolton. Finn J Univ Kans Law Rev; 1976; 25(1):87-107. PubMed ID: 11663734 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Abortion, absolutism, and compromise. Carter SL Yale Law J; 1991 Jun; 100(8):2747-66. PubMed ID: 11656152 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Roe v. Wade: its impact on rights of choice in human reproduction. Patton DE Columbia Human Rights Law Rev; 1973; 5(2):497-521. PubMed ID: 11663415 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Abortion regulation: Louisiana's abortive attempt. Vance RP LA Law Rev; 1974; 34(3):676-85. PubMed ID: 11663504 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. The establishment clause argument for choice. Dow DR Gold Gate Univ Law Rev; 1990; 20(3):479-500. PubMed ID: 11656140 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]