337 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16086509)
1. 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]
2. The constitutionality of court imposed contraception as a condition of probation.
Mubaraki M
Crim Justice J; 1992; 14(2):385-405. PubMed ID: 16700114
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. The right to privacy: Roe v. Wade revisited.
Smith PA
Jurist; 1983; 43(2):289-317. PubMed ID: 16086474
[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. 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]
8. 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]
9. Women's rights versus the protection of fetuses.
Warren MA
Midwest Med Ethics; 1991; 7(1):1, 3-7. PubMed ID: 16145788
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Prenatal v. parental rights: what a difference an "a" makes.
Gallagher A
St Marys Law J; 1989; 21(2):301-24. PubMed ID: 16100799
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. The constitutionality of the use of the Norplant contraceptive device as a condition of probation.
Burke M
Hastings Constit Law Q; 1992; 20(1):207-46. PubMed ID: 11652186
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Symposium: A Celebration of Reproductive Rights: Twenty-Five Years of Roe v. Wade.
Perry T; Garcia MT; Baird B; Frietsche S
Womens Rights Law Report; 1998; 19(3):247-59. PubMed ID: 15871152
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The Norplant prescription: birth control, women control, or crime control?
Arthur SL
UCLA Law Rev; 1992 Oct; 40(1):1-101. PubMed ID: 11652185
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. Compelling pregnancy at death's door.
Taylor KA
Columbia J Gend Law; 1997; 7(1):85-165. PubMed ID: 16184655
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Court-ordered care--a complication of pregnancy to avoid.
Cantor JD
N Engl J Med; 2012 Jun; 366(24):2237-40. PubMed ID: 22693994
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The Norplant debate: birth control or woman control?
Spitz SS
Columbia Human Rights Law Rev; 1993; 25(1):131-69. PubMed ID: 11652335
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessing the viability of a substantive due process right to in vitro fertilization.
Harv Law Rev; 2005 Jun; 118(8):2792-813. PubMed ID: 15988862
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
