189 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23116955)
21. Roe v. Wade reaffirmed.
Annas GJ
Hastings Cent Rep; 1983 Aug; 13(4):21-2. PubMed ID: 6629744
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. The trimester approach: how long can the legal fiction last?
Casurella JG; Schrock CT
Mercer Law Rev; 1984; 35(4):891-913. PubMed ID: 11658750
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Partial-birth abortion, Congress, and the Constitution.
Annas GJ
N Engl J Med; 1998 Jul; 339(4):279-83. PubMed ID: 9673308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Public Law No. 262, 25 March 1988.
United States. Pennsylvania
Annu Rev Popul Law; 1988; 15():51, 336-48. PubMed ID: 12289591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. Perspectives. Supreme Court ruling opens Pandora's Box.
Moskowitz DB
Faulkner Grays Med Health; 1991 Jun; 45(23):suppl 4 p.. PubMed ID: 10110606
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Legal aspects of abortion practice.
Goldman EB
Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 1986 Mar; 13(1):135-43. PubMed ID: 3709009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The viability of the trimester approach.
Calder KA
Univ Baltimore Law Rev; 1984; 13(2):322-45. PubMed ID: 11658808
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Toward a First Amendment theory of doctor-patient discourse and the right to receive unbiased medical advice.
Berg P
Boston Univ Law Rev; 1994 Mar; 74(2):201-66. PubMed ID: 11659979
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Abortion law today.
Field MA
J Leg Med; 1993 Mar; 14(1):3-24. PubMed ID: 8463750
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Women's reproductive rights. Is there a conflict with a child's right to be born free from defects?
Schedler G
J Leg Med; 1986 Sep; 7(3):357-84. PubMed ID: 3490529
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. The inapplicability of parental involvement laws to the distribution of mifepristone (RU-486) to minors.
Scuder AC
Am Univ J Gend Soc Policy Law; 2002; 10(3):711-41. PubMed ID: 16594112
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Supreme Court actions in anti-abortion protest cases.
Health Care Law Newsl; 1994 Apr; 9(4):22-4. PubMed ID: 10133587
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. [Patient education - death after insufficient information about risks: federal supreme court confirms acquittal of doctors].
Steinbrück R
Aktuelle Urol; 2013 Sep; 44(5):357. PubMed ID: 24043534
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Abortion politics and health insurance reform.
Annas GJ
N Engl J Med; 2009 Dec; 361(27):2589-91. PubMed ID: 19955513
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Court releases opinion concerning abortion.
Barton HM
Tex Med; 1992 Oct; 88(10):31-3. PubMed ID: 1462258
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. 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]
38. Roe v. Wade and the euthanasia debate.
Bopp J; Coleson RE
Issues Law Med; 1997; 12(4):343-54. PubMed ID: 9114604
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. 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]
40. So-called "partial birth abortion" bans: bad medicine? Maybe. Bad law? Definitely!
Massie AM
Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 1998; 59(2):301-80. PubMed ID: 11902179
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
