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.
164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1960832)
21. Consti-tortion: tort law as an end-run around abortion rights after Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Stone AJ Am Univ J Gend Soc Policy Law; 2000; 8(2):471-515. PubMed ID: 16594110 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. The Commerce Clause and federal abortion law: why progressives might be tempted to embrace federalism. Goldberg J Fordham Law Rev; 2006 Oct; 75(1):301-54. PubMed ID: 17115483 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Preterm Cleveland v. Voinovich. Ohio. Court of Appeals, Franklin County Wests North East Rep; 1993 Jul; 627():570-92. PubMed ID: 12041182 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. The Title X family planning gag rule: can the government buy up constitutional rights? Chervin CI Stanford Law Rev; 1989 Jan; 41(2):401-34. PubMed ID: 11655926 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. The Supreme Court on abortion funding: the second time around. Horan DJ; Marzen TJ St Louis Univ Law J; 1981; 25(2):411-27. PubMed ID: 11655812 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. The woman's right to know: a model approach to the informed consent of abortion. Renfer SO; Shaheen R; Hegarty M Loyola Univ Chic Law J; 1991; 22(2):409-43. PubMed ID: 11651345 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Rationalizing the abortion debate: legal rhetoric and the abortion controversy. Chemerinsky E Buffalo Law Rev; 1982; 31(1):107-64. PubMed ID: 11655711 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Prenatal screening, autonomy and reasons: the relationship between the law of abortion and wrongful birth. Scott R Med Law Rev; 2003; 11(3):265-325. PubMed ID: 16733877 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. 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]
33. Perspectives on the abortion controversy: amici for appellees -- Brief for bioethicists for privacy as amicus curiae supporting appellees Webster and women's equality Webster and the fundamental right to make medical decisions Abortion counseling and the First Amendment: open questions after Webster Brief for 885 law professors in support of maintaining adherence to the Roe decision. Annas GJ; Glantz LH; Mariner WK; Johnsen D; Wilder MJ; Orentlicher D; Pine RN; Michelman FI; Redlich N; Neuwirth SR; Carty-Bennia D Am J Law Med; 1990 Jan; 15(2-3):169-203. PubMed ID: 11656584 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. A decade of cementing the mosaic of Roe v. Wade: is the composite a message to leave abortion alone? Kudner KE Univ Toledo Law Rev; 1984; 15(2):681-753. PubMed ID: 11649780 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. The Freedom of Choice Act: will the constitution allow it? McClard PS Houst Law Rev; 1994; 30():2041-84. PubMed ID: 11656432 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. A thorn in the side of privacy: the need for reassessment of the constitutional right to abortion. Kunz KA Marquette Law Rev; 1987; 70(3):534-71. PubMed ID: 11655884 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Beyond Jaffee v. Redmond: should the federal courts recognize a right to physician-patient confidentiality? Silver SA Ohio State Law J; 1998; 58(5):1809-66. PubMed ID: 16211748 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Justices uphold abortion rights by narrow vote. Taylor S N Y Times Web; 1986 Jun; ():A1, B10-11. PubMed ID: 11647367 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Massachusetts v. Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit Fed Report; 1990 Mar; 899():53-79. PubMed ID: 11648391 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]