455 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2603860)
1. 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]
2. Legal aspects of abortion practice.
Goldman EB
Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 1986 Mar; 13(1):135-43. PubMed ID: 3709009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Court reaffirms Roe but upholds restrictions.
Fam Plann Perspect; 1992; 24(4):174-7, 185. PubMed ID: 1526274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Baby doe redux? The Department of Health and Human Services and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002: a cautionary note on normative neonatal practice.
Sayeed SA
Pediatrics; 2005 Oct; 116(4):e576-85. PubMed ID: 16199687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Roe v. Wade reaffirmed, again.
Annas GJ
Hastings Cent Rep; 1986 Oct; 16(5):26-7. PubMed ID: 3771197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Abortion: rights or technicalities? A comparison of Roe v. Wade with the abortion decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court.
Brown HO
Hum Life Rev; 1975; 1(3):60-74. PubMed ID: 11662181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Abortion ethics.
Fromer MJ
Nurs Outlook; 1982 Apr; 30(4):234-40. PubMed ID: 7041095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The fight over Roe v. Wade: the Webster briefs.
Fam Plann Perspect; 1989; 21(3):134-6. PubMed ID: 2759219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Casey and the resuscitation of Roe v. Wade.
Robertson JA
Hastings Cent Rep; 1992; 22(5):24-8. PubMed ID: 1428831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Four-one-four.
Annas GJ
Hastings Cent Rep; 1989; 19(5):27-9. PubMed ID: 2793440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [The origin of informed consent].
Mallardi V
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital; 2005 Oct; 25(5):312-27. PubMed ID: 16602332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A new threat to pregnant women's autonomy.
Johnsen D
Hastings Cent Rep; 1987; 17(4):33-40. PubMed ID: 3667248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
