BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

405 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16047444)

  • 1. The validity of legislative restrictions on abortion under the Oregon constitution.
    Tweedt DE
    Temple Law Rev; 1992; 65(4):1349-71. PubMed ID: 16047444
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The right to privacy: Roe v. Wade revisited.
    Smith PA
    Jurist; 1983; 43(2):289-317. PubMed ID: 16086474
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Abortion 1990s: contemporary issues and the activist court.
    Bertz RC
    West State Univ Law Rev; 1992; 19(2):393-429. PubMed ID: 16047452
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Abortion rights after South Dakota.
    McDonagh E
    Free Inq; 2006; 26(4):34-8. PubMed ID: 16830439
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. State v. Oakley: infringing on women's reproductive rights.
    Schehr AR
    Wis Womens Law J; 2003; 18(2):281-97. PubMed ID: 15568247
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Equality of rights under the law: state constitutional protection for abortion rights in Maryland and beyond.
    Forman S
    Wis Womens Law J; 1991; 6():87-117. PubMed ID: 11656290
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A woman's right to choose: wrongful death statutes and abortion rights--consistent at last.
    Siano JR
    Womens Rights Law Report; 1998; 19(3):279-92. PubMed ID: 15871153
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Parental notification of abortion and minors' rights under the Montana constitution.
    Hayhurst MB
    Mont Law Rev; 1997; 58(2):565-98. PubMed ID: 16180294
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. New York v. Sullivan: shhh ... don't say the "a" word! Another outcome-oriented abortion decision.
    Kendall CC
    John Marshall Law Rev; 1990; 23(4):753-70. PubMed ID: 16622962
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Contraception or incarceration: what's wrong with this picture?
    Callahan J
    Stanford Law Pol Rev; 1995-1996 Winter; 7(1):67-82. PubMed ID: 16086509
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Constitutionalizing Roe, Casey and Carhart: a legislative due-process anti-discrimination principle that gives constitutional content to the "undue burden" standard of review applied to abortion control legislation.
    Van Detta JA
    South Calif Rev Law Womens Stud; 2001; 10(2):211-92. PubMed ID: 16485363
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Women's rights in Stalinist Hungary: the abortion trials of 1952-53.
    Peto A; Kossuth E
    Hung Stud Rev; 2002; 29(1-2):49-76. PubMed ID: 17233136
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Choosing substantive justice: a discussion of "choice," "rights" and the new reproductive technologies.
    Cherry AL
    Wis Womens Law J; 1997; 11(3):431-41. PubMed ID: 16281338
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. HIPAA, Privacy, and Reproductive Rights in a Post-Roe Era.
    Shachar C
    JAMA; 2022 Aug; 328(5):417-418. PubMed ID: 35838680
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Journey through the courts: minors, abortion and the quest for reproductive fairness.
    Ehrlich JS
    Yale J Law Fem; 1998; 10(1):1-27. PubMed ID: 16596765
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Disputes over frozen preembryos and the "right not to be a parent".
    Pachman TS
    Columbia J Gend Law; 2003; 12(1):128-53. PubMed ID: 16281330
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. How far can a state go to protect a fetus? The Rebecca Corneau story and the case for requiring Massachusetts to follow the U.S. Constitution.
    Bower HR
    Gold Gate Univ Law Rev; 2001; 31(1):123-54. PubMed ID: 12666688
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The social meaning of the Norplant condition: constitutional considerations of race, class, and gender.
    Albiston C
    Berkeley Womens Law J; 1994; 9():9-57. PubMed ID: 16767841
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Banning partial-birth abortion: drafting a constitutionally acceptable statute.
    Gough AD
    Univ Dayton Law Rev; 1998; 24(1):187-214. PubMed ID: 12774818
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.