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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11664694)

  • 1. The right to an abortion--problems with parental and spousal consent.
    Goldbach V
    NY Law Sch Law Rev; 1976; 22(1):65-86. PubMed ID: 11664694
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Constitutional law--abortion--parental and spousal consent requirements violate right to privacy in abortion decision.
    Sanders JE
    Univ Kans Law Rev; 1976; 24(2):446-62. PubMed ID: 11664628
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Constitutional law--right to privacy--spousal consent to abortion: foreshadowing the fall of parental consent.
    Kenworthy L
    Suffolk Univ Law Rev; 1975; 9(3):841-72. PubMed ID: 11664519
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Abortion and privacy: a woman's right to self determination.
    Kraus AR
    Southwest Univ Law Rev; 1978; 10(1):173-93. PubMed ID: 11664982
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Constitutional law--abortion--parental and spousal consent requirements--right to privacy.
    Long SL; Ravenscraft P
    Akron Law Rev; 1976; 10(2):367-82. PubMed ID: 11664733
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The family at bay.
    DeMarco D
    Hum Life Rev; 1982; 8(4):44-54. PubMed ID: 11651705
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The right of a husband or a minor's parent to participate in the abortion decision.
    Judson SH
    Univ Miami Law Rev; 1973; 28(1):251-6. PubMed ID: 11664356
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Third party consent to abortions before and after Danforth: a theoretical analysis.
    Schell MS
    J Fam Law; 1976; 15(3):508-36. PubMed ID: 11663801
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Reproduction and the law.
    Erickson NS
    Med Trial Tech Q; 1985; 32(2):165-74. PubMed ID: 11649200
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Human rights, abortion and the law.
    Sharkey PW
    Philos Res Analysis; 1978; 7(1):8-10. PubMed ID: 11663853
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Constitutional law--abortion--statute requiring spousal and parental consent declared unconstitutional.
    Lenobel J
    Cumberland Law Rev; 1977; 7(3):539-50. PubMed ID: 11661517
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The consent question--parental and spousal consent for abortions.
    Davis CD
    Tex Hosp; 1976 Sep; 32(9):27-30. PubMed ID: 11664739
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The husband's rights in abortion.
    Etzioni A
    Trial; 1976 Nov; 12(11):56-8. PubMed ID: 11664680
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Workability of the undue burden test.
    Schneider EA
    Temple Law Rev; 1993; 66(3):1003-37. PubMed ID: 11659882
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Poe v. Gerstein. 18 Aug 1975.
    U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
    Fed Report; 1975; 517():787-97. PubMed ID: 11646046
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Doe v. Doe. 3 Jul 1974.
    Massachusetts. Supreme Judicial Court, Suffolk
    North East Rep Second Ser; 1974; 314():128-39. PubMed ID: 12038346
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Poe v. Gerstein.
    Sanders AD
    Hofstra Law Rev; 1976; 4(2):531-47. PubMed ID: 11664627
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Paternal interests in the abortion decision: does the father have a say?
    Diggins M
    Univ Chic Leg Forum; 1989; 1989():377-97. PubMed ID: 11656041
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. doe v. Doe: the wife's right to an abortion over her husband's objections.
    Forman HM
    New Engl Law Rev; 1975; 11(1):205-24. PubMed ID: 11664560
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Constitutional law--abortion--court focuses on husband's interest regarding spousal notification requirement to procure abortion: Scheinberg v. Smith, 659 F.2d 746 (5th Cir. 1981).
    Adams C
    Cumberland Law Rev; 1982-1983; 13(1):143-59. PubMed ID: 11658434
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.