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.
124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37220567)
1. Legal personhood and frozen embryos: implications for fertility patients and providers in post- Letterie G; Fox D J Law Biosci; 2023; 10(1):lsad006. PubMed ID: 37220567 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Roe v Wade and the Threat to Fertility Care. Feinberg EC; Kawwass JF; Cedars MI Obstet Gynecol; 2022 Oct; 140(4):557-559. PubMed ID: 35861359 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. In re: the disposition of frozen embryos: 2022. Letterie G Fertil Steril; 2022 Mar; 117(3):477-480. PubMed ID: 35131103 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Selective pregnancy reduction: medical attitudes, legal implications, and a viable alternative. Gemmette EV J Health Polit Policy Law; 1991; 16(2):383-95. PubMed ID: 1894927 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Roe v Wade and the new Jane Crow: reproductive rights in the age of mass incarceration. Paltrow LM Am J Public Health; 2013 Jan; 103(1):17-21. PubMed ID: 23153159 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Beyond Roe, after Casey: the present and future of a "fundamental" right. Benshoof J Womens Health Issues; 1993; 3(3):162-70. PubMed ID: 8274872 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Will Webster redefine Roe v. Wade? The Supreme Court could use a Missouri case to begin limiting abortion rights. Chopko ME Health Prog; 1989 Jun; 70(5):58-64. PubMed ID: 10293331 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Undue Burdens: State Abortion Laws in the United States, 1994-2022. Roth LM; Lee JH J Health Polit Policy Law; 2023 Aug; 48(4):511-543. PubMed ID: 36693181 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Human life symposium: a synopsis and critique. Taub S Law Med Health Care; 1982 Jun; 10(3):129-34. PubMed ID: 6920538 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. In vitro fertilization and multiple pregnancies: an evidence-based analysis. Medical Advisory Secretariat Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2006; 6(18):1-63. PubMed ID: 23074488 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Beyond Abortion: The Consequences of Overturning Paltrow LM; Harris LH; Marshall MF Am J Bioeth; 2022 Aug; 22(8):3-15. PubMed ID: 35652910 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Protecting Health after Dobbs. Clark BR Hastings Cent Rep; 2022 Nov; 52(6):6-7. PubMed ID: 36537270 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. The role of women in abortion jurisprudence: from Roe to Casey and beyond. Martin PA Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 1993; 2(3):309-19. PubMed ID: 8293219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. International dimensions of the Department of Justice arguments in the Webster case. Cook RJ Law Med Health Care; 1989; 17(4):384-94. PubMed ID: 2628654 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The laws that affect abortion in the United States and their impact on women's health. Harrison LK; Naylor KL Nurse Pract; 1991 Dec; 16(12):53-9. PubMed ID: 1798604 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]