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.
119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1749321)
1. "Rust v. Sullivan". Rhodes AM MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs; 1991; 16(6):329-30. PubMed ID: 1749321 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Law, medicine, and the "gag rule". Ball JR Ann Intern Med; 1991 Sep; 115(5):403-4. PubMed ID: 1863032 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
6. Radical Changes for Reproductive Health Care - Proposed Regulations for Title X. Bronstein JM N Engl J Med; 2018 Aug; 379(8):706-708. PubMed ID: 30021079 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Mum's the word: the Supreme Court and family planning. Mariner WK Am J Public Health; 1992 Feb; 82(2):296-301. PubMed ID: 1739169 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Abortion 'gag' rule. Notkin H West J Med; 1991 Aug; 155(2):191. PubMed ID: 1926860 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Title X, the abortion debate, and the First Amendment. Shapiro AA Columbia Law Rev; 1990 Oct; 90(6):1737-78. PubMed ID: 15739274 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Rust corrodes: the First Amendment implications of Rust v. Sullivan. Fitzpatrick M Stanford Law Rev; 1992 Nov; 45(1):185-227. PubMed ID: 10183813 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Rust v. Sullivan: a better debate. America (NY); 1991 Jun; 164(22):611. PubMed ID: 15991418 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. USA: victory over gag rule for family planning groups. Frankel DH Lancet; 1992 Nov; 340(8829):1215. PubMed ID: 1359274 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cutting family planning in Texas. White K; Grossman D; Hopkins K; Potter JE N Engl J Med; 2012 Sep; 367(13):1179-81. PubMed ID: 23013071 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Courts cloud ban on abortion counseling. Wagner L Mod Healthc; 1988 Mar; 18(10):20. PubMed ID: 10286301 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Women and children last--the predictable effects of proposed federal funding cuts. Annas GJ; Mariner WK N Engl J Med; 2011 Apr; 364(17):1590-1. PubMed ID: 21470003 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Rust v. Sullivan, and the future of abortion under a more conservative Supreme Court. Browning DA J Med Assoc Ga; 1991 Sep; 80(9):499-501. PubMed ID: 1744530 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. U.S.: Obama lifts ban on funding for international groups performing or counselling abortions. HIV AIDS Policy Law Rev; 2009 May; 14(1):33, 35. PubMed ID: 19610210 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Why the government is not required to subsidize abortion counseling and referral. Hirt TC Harv Law Rev; 1988 Jun; 101(8):1895-915. PubMed ID: 10288539 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The Chastity Act: government manipulation of abortion information and the First Amendment. Benshoof J Harv Law Rev; 1988 Jun; 101(8):1916-37. PubMed ID: 10288540 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]