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.
160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2603859)
1. Webster and women's equality. Johnsen D; Wilder MJ Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):178-84. PubMed ID: 2603859 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Webster and the fundamental right to make medical decisions. Orentlicher D Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):184-8. PubMed ID: 2603860 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Webster versus reproductive health services. Rhodes AM MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs; 1989; 14(6):423. PubMed ID: 2514333 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Brief for 885 law professors in support of maintaining adherence to the Roe decision. Michelman FI; Redlich N; Neuwirth SR; Carty-Bennia D Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):197-203. PubMed ID: 2603862 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A Rehnquistean bed: the abortion issue revisited. Maher VF; Badin R J N Y State Nurses Assoc; 1990 Dec; 21(4):4-5. PubMed ID: 2269898 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Roe v. Wade is constitutionally unprincipled and logically incoherent: a brief in support of judicial restraint. Gerard JB Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):222-6. PubMed ID: 2603866 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Webster amicus curiae briefs: perspectives on the abortion controversy and the role of the Supreme Court. Conclusion: the future of abortion as a "private choice". Grant ER Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):233-43. PubMed ID: 2603867 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Anti-abortion movement. Wilson K Plan Parent Rev; 1985; 5(2):4-6. PubMed ID: 12340405 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The Supreme Court, privacy, and abortion. Annas GJ N Engl J Med; 1989 Oct; 321(17):1200-3. PubMed ID: 2677728 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Rethinking Roe. Scofield GR Trends Health Care Law Ethics; 1993; 8(3):17-20, 16. PubMed ID: 8118132 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Brief for bioethicists for privacy as amicus curiae supporting appellees. Annas GJ; Glantz LH; Mariner WK Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):169-77. PubMed ID: 2603858 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Abortion: a history. Hovey G Plan Parent Rev; 1985; 5(2):18-21. PubMed ID: 12340403 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Roe v. Wade and the lesson of the pre-Roe case law. Morgan RG Mich Law Rev; 1979 Aug; 77(7):1724-48. PubMed ID: 10245969 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Right to abortion: the courts versus the legislatures. Bernstein AH Hospitals; 1980 Jan; 54(1):30-4. PubMed ID: 6985600 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]