279 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16700122)
1. The abortion debate thirty years later: from choice to coercion.
Kramlich M
Fordham Urban Law J; 2004 Mar; 31(3):783-804. PubMed ID: 16700122
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The misperception and misapplication of the First Amendment in the American pluralistic system: mergers between Catholic and non-Catholic healthcare systems.
Kellhofer JM
J Law Health; 2001-2002; 16(1):103-43. PubMed ID: 14650774
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Coercing conscience: the effort to mandate abortion as a standard of care.
Kramlich M
Natl Cathol Bioeth Q; 2004; 4(1):29-40. PubMed ID: 15192848
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. State Abortion Restrictions and the New Supreme Court: Women's Access to Reproductive Health Services.
Reingold RB; Gostin LO
JAMA; 2019 Jul; 322(1):21-22. PubMed ID: 31166573
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. [Female doctors' association: the right to abortion must be defended].
Lichtenstein D; Körlin J
Lakartidningen; 2015 Jan; 112():. PubMed ID: 25603187
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Access to abortion in the USA-the legal battle.
Cleaver G
Lancet; 2017 Jun; 389(10087):2361-2362. PubMed ID: 28635601
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The argument that never ends.
Simon R
US News World Rep; 2003 Jan; 134(2):24. PubMed ID: 12561696
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. University hospital plan would exclude abortions.
Rabinovitz J
N Y Times Web; 1997 Jul; ():26. PubMed ID: 11647227
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Reproductive liberty under the threat of care: deputizing private agents and deconstructing state action.
Kelly L
Mich J Gend Law; 1998-1999; 5(1):81-111. PubMed ID: 16596758
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Whole Women's Victory - or Not?
Charo RA
N Engl J Med; 2016 Sep; 375(9):809-11. PubMed ID: 27579630
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The intimidation of American physicians--banning partial-birth abortion.
Greene MF
N Engl J Med; 2007 May; 356(21):2128-9. PubMed ID: 17452436
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The partial death of abortion rights.
Charo RA
N Engl J Med; 2007 May; 356(21):2125-8. PubMed ID: 17452437
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Morgentaler's call for secular-only hospitals earns tepid response.
Gagnon L
CMAJ; 2003 Feb; 168(3):331. PubMed ID: 12566353
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Judicial diagnosis 'conscience' vs. care how refusal clauses are reshaping the rights revolution.
Appel JM
Med Health R I; 2005 Aug; 88(8):279-81. PubMed ID: 16273974
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Handicapping the odds on the future of Roe v. Wade: can the right to abortion survive in the High Court?
Drenning MG
Health Care Law Mon; 2003 Mar; ():3-9. PubMed ID: 12698761
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Saving Roe is not enough: when religion controls healthcare.
Fogel SB; Rivera LA
Fordham Urban Law J; 2004 Mar; 31(3):725-49. PubMed ID: 16700119
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Casey, Bray and beyond: religious liberty and the abortion debate.
Simmons PD
St Louis Univ Public Law Rev; 1993; 13(1):467-88. PubMed ID: 11656618
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The highly complex issue of conscientious objection to abortion: can the recent European Court of Human Rights ruling Grimmark v. Sweden redefine the notions of care before freedom of conscience?
Zaami S; Rinaldi R; Montanari Vergallo G
Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care; 2021 Aug; 26(4):349-355. PubMed ID: 33821720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Implications of the Federal Abortion Ban for Women's Health in the United States.
Weitz TA; Yanow S
Reprod Health Matters; 2008 May; 16(31 Suppl):99-107. PubMed ID: 18772090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
