230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21774157)
1. Lesbians and abortion.
Robson R
Rev Law Soc Change; 2011; 35(1):247-79. PubMed ID: 21774157
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Choosing balance: congressional powers and the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.
Schecter A
Fordham Law Rev; 2005 Mar; 73(4):1987-2206. PubMed ID: 15828129
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The Supreme Court and abortion rights.
Annas GJ
N Engl J Med; 2007 May; 356(21):2201-7. PubMed ID: 17476003
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Is the right to health a necessary precondition for gender equality?
Hammell H
Rev Law Soc Change; 2011; 35(1):131-93. PubMed ID: 21936123
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. What Lawrence v. Texas says about the history and future of reproductive rights.
Dailard C
Fordham Urban Law J; 2004 Mar; 31(3):717-23. PubMed ID: 16700117
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Abortion 1990s: contemporary issues and the activist court.
Bertz RC
West State Univ Law Rev; 1992; 19(2):393-429. PubMed ID: 16047452
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The worst of both worlds?: parental involvement requirements and the privacy rights of mature minors.
O'Shaughnessy M
Ohio State Law J; 1996; 57(5):1731-65. PubMed ID: 16086519
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. State constitutional privacy rights post Webster--broader protection against abortion restrictions?
Ezzard MM
Denver Univ Law Rev; 1990; 67(3):401-19. PubMed ID: 15999439
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The supreme court and the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003: a political procedure replaces woman-centered care.
Blumenthal PD; Winikoff B
MedGenMed; 2007 Jun; 9(2):52. PubMed ID: 17955106
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Whither the family and family privacy?
Jones TR; Peterman L
Tex Rev Law Polit; 1999; 4(1):193-236. PubMed ID: 15706723
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. How important was the Pill to women's economic well-being? If Roe v. Wade were overturned, how might society change?
Joyce T
J Policy Anal Manage; 2013; 32(4):879-87. PubMed ID: 24665470
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Justice Blackmun and the little people.
Meehan M
Hum Life Rev; 2004; 30(3):86-128. PubMed ID: 15675080
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Women's rights versus the protection of fetuses.
Warren MA
Midwest Med Ethics; 1991; 7(1):1, 3-7. PubMed ID: 16145788
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Beyond personhood and autonomy: moral theory and the premises of privacy.
Rappaport AJ
Utah Law Rev; 2001; 2001(2):441-507. PubMed ID: 16538746
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The right to privacy: Roe v. Wade revisited.
Smith PA
Jurist; 1983; 43(2):289-317. PubMed ID: 16086474
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Fetal viability as a threshold to personhood. A legal analysis.
Peterfy A
J Leg Med; 1995 Dec; 16(4):607-36. PubMed ID: 8568420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Journey through the courts: minors, abortion and the quest for reproductive fairness.
Ehrlich JS
Yale J Law Fem; 1998; 10(1):1-27. PubMed ID: 16596765
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
