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 *

218 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17666593)

  • 21. Legal failure or moral success? An evaluation of the ban on partial-birth abortion.
    Kolenc AB
    America (NY); 2004 Nov; 191(17):11-4. PubMed ID: 15675070
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Coming full circle: a reflection on the Supreme Court's decision in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt.
    Toti S
    Contraception; 2016 Nov; 94(5):439-440. PubMed ID: 27639929
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Stenberg v. Carhart: women retain their right to choose.
    Berkowitz JF
    J Crim Law Criminol; 2001; 91(2):337-83. PubMed ID: 12774791
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Do not mess with Texas: A landmark victory for abortion access and the road ahead.
    Kumar B
    Contraception; 2016 Nov; 94(5):445-446. PubMed ID: 27639931
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Inverting the viability test for abortion law.
    Ching B
    Womens Rights Law Report; 2000; 22(1):37-45. PubMed ID: 16281341
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Morgentaler v. The Queen in the Supreme Court of Canada.
    Martin SL
    Can J Women Law; 1987-1988; 2(2):422-31. PubMed ID: 17076040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Banning partial-birth abortions: a few inches away from testing post-viability jurisprudence.
    Flanagan PP
    Seton Hall Legis J; 1998; 23(1):141-77. PubMed ID: 16514753
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Will rejecting woman-protective justifications for antiabortion laws increase harassment and violence?
    Cohen DS
    Contraception; 2016 Nov; 94(5):441-444. PubMed ID: 27639930
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Congress ignores the parameters of the health exception. Judicial responses to congressional evidence and partial-birth abortion in Thewake of Stenberg v. Carhart.
    Bailey BJ
    J Leg Med; 2006 Mar; 27(1):71-85. PubMed ID: 16510366
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The development of the undue burden standard in Stenberg v. Carhart: will proposed RU-486 legislation survive?
    Guenther H
    Indiana Law Rev; 2002; 35(3):1021-44. PubMed ID: 16211757
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

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

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. "Partial birth" abortion and the health exception: protecting maternal health or risking abortion on demand?
    Glidewell G
    Fordham Urban Law J; 2001 Apr; 28(4):1089-150. PubMed ID: 12680381
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.
    Gordon A
    Harvard J Legis; 2004; 41(2):501-15. PubMed ID: 16596750
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. Jon O. Newman and the abortion decisions: a remarkable first year.
    Hurwitz AD
    NY Law Sch Law Rev; 2002-2003; 46(1-2):231-47. PubMed ID: 16493839
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Stenberg v. Carhart: have the states lost their power to regulate abortion?
    Gauthier AM
    New Engl Law Rev; 2002; 36(3):625-68. PubMed ID: 15212038
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Roe revisited: a grim fairy tale.
    Roden GJ
    Hum Life Rev; 2004; 30(2):49-57. PubMed ID: 15540376
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The rights of pregnant women: the Supreme Court and drug testing.
    Gostin LO
    Hastings Cent Rep; 2001; 31(5):8-9. PubMed ID: 12974111
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.