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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

289 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3523563)

  • 1. Abortion: the new debate.
    Callahan D
    Prim Care; 1986 Jun; 13(2):255-62. PubMed ID: 3523563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. How technology is reframing the abortion debate.
    Callahan D
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1986 Feb; 16(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 3514547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Roe v. Wade. Revisiting the fundamentals.
    Benshoof J
    Conscience; 1998; 18(4):16-7. PubMed ID: 12178876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The abortion debate: can this chronic public illness be cured?
    Callahan D
    Clin Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Dec; 35(4):783-91. PubMed ID: 1451361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Abortion ethics.
    Fromer MJ
    Nurs Outlook; 1982 Apr; 30(4):234-40. PubMed ID: 7041095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Can Congress settle the abortion issue?
    Segers MC
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1982 Jun; 12(3):20-8. PubMed ID: 7107237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 25 years after Roe: new technological parameters for an old debate.
    Cohen SA
    Guttmacher Rep Public Policy; 1998 Feb; 1(1):5, 12. PubMed ID: 12321448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Four-one-four.
    Annas GJ
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1989; 19(5):27-9. PubMed ID: 2793440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Abortion in America: 12 years after Roe v. Wade.
    Popul Today; 1985 Nov; 13(11):2, 8-9. PubMed ID: 12267463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Anti-abortion movement.
    Wilson K
    Plan Parent Rev; 1985; 5(2):4-6. PubMed ID: 12340405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. The "gag rule" revisited: physicians as abortion gatekeepers.
    Bloche MG
    Law Med Health Care; 1992; 20(4):392-402. PubMed ID: 11651561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Is there life after Roe v. Wade?
    Mahowald MB
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1989; 19(4):22-9. PubMed ID: 2663777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Roe v. Wade. Jane's perspective.
    Kaplan L
    Conscience; 1998; 18(4):27-8. PubMed ID: 12178883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Criminal liability of physicians: an encroachment on the abortion right?
    Barber RA
    Am Crim Law Rev; 1981; 18(4):591-615. PubMed ID: 11655468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.