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 *

454 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14758819)

  • 41. Lochner redeemed: family privacy after Troxel and Carhart.
    Meyer DD
    UCLA Law Rev; 2001 Jun; 48(5):1125-90. PubMed ID: 16273684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Parental notification and a minor's right to an abortion after Hodgson and Akron II.
    Graziano SG
    Ohio North Univ Law Rev; 1991; 17(3):581-97. PubMed ID: 16145809
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Stenberg v. Carhart: have the states lost their power to regulate abortion?
    Gauthier AM
    New Engl Law Rev; 2002; 36(3):625-68. PubMed ID: 15212038
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. The inapplicability of parental involvement laws to the distribution of mifepristone (RU-486) to minors.
    Scuder AC
    Am Univ J Gend Soc Policy Law; 2002; 10(3):711-41. PubMed ID: 16594112
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Separation of health, state. Recent legislation has providers caught in the debate over government involvement in personal medical decisions.
    Romano M
    Mod Healthc; 2003 Oct; 33(43):4-5, 12, 1. PubMed ID: 14626601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Abortion politics and health insurance reform.
    Annas GJ
    N Engl J Med; 2009 Dec; 361(27):2589-91. PubMed ID: 19955513
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Lesbians and abortion.
    Robson R
    Rev Law Soc Change; 2011; 35(1):247-79. PubMed ID: 21774157
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Inverting the viability test for abortion law.
    Ching B
    Womens Rights Law Report; 2000; 22(1):37-45. PubMed ID: 16281341
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Abortion debate divides Mexico.
    LaFranchi H
    Christ Sci Monitor (East Ed); 2000 Aug; 92(184):6. PubMed ID: 15586922
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Legal failure or moral success? An evaluation of the ban on partial-birth abortion.
    Kolenc AB
    America (NY); 2004 Nov; 191(17):11-4. PubMed ID: 15675070
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. The pregnant silence: Rust v. Sullivan, abortion rights, and publicly funded speech.
    Weeks AB
    North Carol Law Rev; 1992 Jun; 70(5):1623-68. PubMed ID: 16044600
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. So-called "partial birth abortion" bans: bad medicine? Maybe. Bad law? Definitely!
    Massie AM
    Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 1998; 59(2):301-80. PubMed ID: 11902179
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The Supreme Court's Abortion Exceptionalism - Judicial Deference, Medical Science, and Mifepristone Access.
    Fox D; Cole E
    N Engl J Med; 2021 Jun; 384(24):e94. PubMed ID: 33909959
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. The Commerce Clause and federal abortion law: why progressives might be tempted to embrace federalism.
    Goldberg J
    Fordham Law Rev; 2006 Oct; 75(1):301-54. PubMed ID: 17115483
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. When does a fetus become a child in need of an advocate? Focusing on fetal pain.
    McDonald TB
    Child Leg Rights J; 1997; 17(2):12-9. PubMed ID: 12159907
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Morality and the state, law and legalism.
    Capron AM
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1996; 26(6):35-7. PubMed ID: 8970800
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Evolving State-Based Contraceptive and Abortion Policies.
    Mallampati D; Simon MA; Janiak E
    JAMA; 2017 Jun; 317(24):2481-2482. PubMed ID: 28558101
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Substantive due process after Gonzales v. Carhart.
    Calabresi SG
    Mich Law Rev; 2008 Jun; 106(8):1517-42. PubMed ID: 18595213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. The rhetoric of disrespect: uncovering the faulty premises infecting reproductive rights.
    Reilly EA
    Am Univ J Gend Soc Policy Law; 1996; 5(1):147-205. PubMed ID: 16594108
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Hippocrates to HIPAA: a foundation for a federal physician-patient privilege.
    Ruebner R; Reis LA
    Temple Law Rev; 2004; 77(3):505-75. PubMed ID: 17066561
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.