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 *

291 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16145782)

  • 1. Abortion in America.
    Shostak AB
    Futurist; 1991; 25(4):20-4. PubMed ID: 16145782
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Family law I: abortion.
    Koscs ME
    Annu Surv Am Law; 1984; 2():929-60. PubMed ID: 16086473
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Parents, judges, and a minor's abortion decisions: third party participation and the evolution of a judicial alternative.
    Green W
    Akron Law Rev; 1983; 17(1):87-110. PubMed ID: 16086471
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The worst of both worlds?: parental involvement requirements and the privacy rights of mature minors.
    O'Shaughnessy M
    Ohio State Law J; 1996; 57(5):1731-65. PubMed ID: 16086519
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. What "choice" do they have?: protecting pregnant minors' reproductive rights using state constitutions.
    Weissmann R
    Annu Surv Am Law; 1999; 1999(1):129-67. PubMed ID: 11958234
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Grounded in the reality of their lives: listening to teens who make the abortion decision without involving their parents.
    Ehrlich JS
    Berkeley Womens Law J; 2003; 18():61-180. PubMed ID: 15156878
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Splitting the baby: when can a pregnant minor obtain an abortion without parental consent? The Ex parte Anonymous cases (Alabama 2001).
    Rosenberg SP
    Conn Law Rev; 2002; 34(3):1109-41. PubMed ID: 15212029
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Minors as medical decision makers: the pretextual reasoning of the court in the abortion cases.
    Ehrlich JS
    Mich J Gend Law; 2000; 7(1):65-106. PubMed ID: 12715809
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Minor rights: the adolescent abortion cases.
    Guggenheim M
    Hofstra Law Rev; 2002; 30(3):589-646. PubMed ID: 15212070
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Preserving the right to choose: a minor's right to confidential reproductive health care.
    Bertuglia J
    Womens Rights Law Report; 2001; 23(1):63-77. PubMed ID: 12774775
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Whither the family and family privacy?
    Jones TR; Peterman L
    Tex Rev Law Polit; 1999; 4(1):193-236. PubMed ID: 15706723
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Case reopens abortion issue for justices.
    Greenhouse L
    N Y Times Web; 2005 Nov; ():A19. PubMed ID: 16450459
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The next abortion decision.
    N Y Times Web; 2005 Nov; ():A34. PubMed ID: 16450474
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. State constitutional privacy rights post Webster--broader protection against abortion restrictions?
    Ezzard MM
    Denver Univ Law Rev; 1990; 67(3):401-19. PubMed ID: 15999439
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Law, ethics, and abortion.
    Bayer R
    Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol; 1990 Aug; 2(4):564-9. PubMed ID: 2130954
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Winter count: taking stock of abortion rights after Casey and Carhart.
    Borgmann CE
    Fordham Urban Law J; 2004 Mar; 31(3):675-716. PubMed ID: 16700116
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Mazurek v. Armstrong: should states be allowed to restrict the performance of abortions to licensed physicians only?
    Bazzelle RY
    Thurgood Marshall Law Rev; 1998; 24(1):149-82. PubMed ID: 16200693
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.