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.
171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3333215)
21. Let's rethink Roe v. Wade--and overturn it. Mulder J Am J Bioeth; 2010 Dec; 10(12):65-6. PubMed ID: 21161853 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Legal abortion: the impending obsolescence of the trimester framework. Mangel CP Am J Law Med; 1988; 14(1):69-108. PubMed ID: 3068986 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Fetal experimentation: rights of the father and questions of personhood. Wilson JP Villanova Law Rev; 1977 Jan; 22(2):403-17. PubMed ID: 11664801 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. The legal status of the unborn after Webster. Parness JA Dickinson Law Rev; 1990; 95(1):1-22. PubMed ID: 11659394 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Overruling Roe v. Wade: an analysis of the proposed Constitutional amendments. Rice CE Boston Coll Ind Commer Law Rev; 1973 Dec; 15(2):307-41. PubMed ID: 11663416 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. 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]
30. Medical responsibility for fetal survival under Roe and Doe. Sendor BB Harv Civ Rights-Civil Lib Law Rev; 1975; 10(2):444-71. PubMed ID: 11663614 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Society's interest in protection for the fetus. Flegel KM CMAJ; 1998 Apr; 158(7):895-6. PubMed ID: 9559015 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Haunting shadows from the rubble of Roe's right of privacy. Haley JN Suffolk Univ Law Rev; 1974; 9(1):145-84. PubMed ID: 11664401 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Roe v. Wade--the abortion decision--an analysis and its implications. Riggs T San Diego Law Rev; 1973 Jun; 10(4):844-56. PubMed ID: 11661026 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. To be or not to be: protecting the unborn's potentiality of life. Parness JA; Pritchard SK Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1982; 51(2):257-98. PubMed ID: 11658559 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. The fetus as a patient: emerging rights as a person? Lenow JL Am J Law Med; 1983; 9(1):1-29. PubMed ID: 6638018 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. The legal impact of the Roe and Doe decisions. Granfield D Jurist; 1973; 33(2):113-22. PubMed ID: 11663427 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Reexamining Roe: nineteenth-century abortion statutes and the Fourteenth Amendment. Witherspoon JS St Marys Law J; 1985; 17(1):29-71. PubMed ID: 11655872 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. The Supreme Court 1972 term. Foreward: toward a model of roles in the due process of life and law. Tribe LH Harv Law Rev; 1973 Nov; 87(1):1-53. PubMed ID: 11663596 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Roe v. Wade reaffirmed. Annas GJ Hastings Cent Rep; 1983 Aug; 13(4):21-2. PubMed ID: 6629744 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Is Roe v. Wade obsolete? Destro RA Hum Life Rev; 1998; 24(3):55-70. PubMed ID: 11657681 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]