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 *

212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19137746)

  • 1. God's littlest children and the right to live: the case for a positivist pro-life overturning of Roe.
    Marcin RB
    J Contemp Health Law Policy; 2008; 25(1):38-75. PubMed ID: 19137746
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A supportive yet critical response to "Rethinking Roe v. Wade: defending the abortion right in the face of contemporary opposition".
    Liebegott K
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Dec; 10(12):61-3. PubMed ID: 21161851
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Defending my "rethinking" of Roe.
    Manninen BA
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Dec; 10(12):W3-5. PubMed ID: 21161830
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cardinal Bernardin on the "forgotten factor" and other gaps in the abortion debate.
    Stahel TH
    America (NY); 1990 Apr; 162(13):354-6. PubMed ID: 15991413
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The unacknowledged consensus on abortion.
    Watson K
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Dec; 10(12):57-9. PubMed ID: 21161849
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Abortion rights: why conservatives are wrong.
    Edwards RB
    Natl Forum; 1989; 69(4):19, 21, 23. PubMed ID: 16100837
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Location and life: how Stenberg v. Carhart undercut Roe v. Wade.
    Stith R
    William Mary J Women Law; 2003; 9(2):255-78. PubMed ID: 15977326
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Manninen's defense of abortion rights is unsuccessful.
    Marquis D
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Dec; 10(12):56-7. PubMed ID: 21161848
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Fetuses are neither violinists nor violators.
    Eberl JT
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Dec; 10(12):53-4. PubMed ID: 21161846
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Let's rethink Roe v. Wade--and overturn it.
    Mulder J
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Dec; 10(12):65-6. PubMed ID: 21161853
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Constitutionalizing Roe, Casey and Carhart: a legislative due-process anti-discrimination principle that gives constitutional content to the "undue burden" standard of review applied to abortion control legislation.
    Van Detta JA
    South Calif Rev Law Womens Stud; 2001; 10(2):211-92. PubMed ID: 16485363
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Is there life after Roe? How to think about the fetus.
    Kissling F
    Conscience; 2004-2005 Winter; 25(3):10-8. PubMed ID: 16538752
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. No to abortion: posture, not policy.
    O'Brien D
    America (NY); 2005 May; 192(19):7-9. PubMed ID: 16175695
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Abortion and moral arguments from analogy.
    Nobis N; Jarr-Koroma AS
    Am J Bioeth; 2010 Dec; 10(12):59-61. PubMed ID: 21161850
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The legal status of abortion in the states if Roe v. Wade is overruled.
    Linton PB
    Issues Law Med; 2007; 23(1):3-43. PubMed ID: 17703698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Rust v. Sullivan: a better debate.
    America (NY); 1991 Jun; 164(22):611. PubMed ID: 15991418
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Democracy and abortion.
    Liebman MH
    Linacre Q; 2005 Nov; 72(4):331-7. PubMed ID: 16471034
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Worst choice: why we'd be better off without Roe.
    Rosen J
    New Repub; 2003 Feb; 228(7):15-6, 18. PubMed ID: 12769107
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Abrogating stare decisis by statute: may Congress remove the precedential effect of Roe and Casey?
    Paulsen MS
    Yale Law J; 2001; 109(7):1535-602. PubMed ID: 16281343
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Abortion and its viability standard: the woman's diminishing right to choose.
    Swyers MH
    Geoge Mason Univ Civ Rights Law J; 1997; 8(1-2):87-109. PubMed ID: 14628785
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.