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 *

171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 4038540)

  • 41. Abortion and a nation at war.
    First Things; 1992 Oct; 26():9-13. PubMed ID: 11659506
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Abortion rights of minors weighed.
    Taylor S
    N Y Times Web; 1987 Nov; ():B32. PubMed ID: 11647378
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. The Supreme Court upholds parental notice requirements.
    Fam Plann Perspect; 1990; 22(4):177-81. PubMed ID: 2226749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Abortion and the consideration of fundamental, irreconcilable interests.
    Jones CJ
    Syracuse Law Rev; 1982; 33(2):565-613. PubMed ID: 11658668
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Planned Parenthood v. Casey: the death of repose in reproductive decisionmaking.
    Nivala J
    Const Law J; 1993; 4(1):47-95. PubMed ID: 12083095
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Abortion choice and the law in Vermont: a recent study.
    Olmstead FH
    Vt Law Rev; 1982; 7(2):281-313. PubMed ID: 11655820
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. State legislation on abortion after Roe v. Wade: selected constitutional issues.
    Bryant MD
    Am J Law Med; 1976; 2(1):101-32. PubMed ID: 973625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Abortion--an update.
    Guthman HL
    Med Trial Tech Q; 1985; 32(2):175-91. PubMed ID: 11649201
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Abortion rights of young women: the Supreme Court attacks the most vulnerable.
    Heller S
    Washburn Law J; 1990; 30(1):15-28. PubMed ID: 11659579
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Feminist litigation: an oxymoron? -- a study of the briefs filed in William L. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services.
    Colker R
    Harv Womens Law J; 1990; 13():137-88. PubMed ID: 11656053
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Workability of the undue burden test.
    Schneider EA
    Temple Law Rev; 1993; 66(3):1003-37. PubMed ID: 11659882
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Planned Parenthood v Casey. The impact of the new undue burden standard on reproductive health care.
    Benshoof J
    JAMA; 1993 May; 269(17):2249-57. PubMed ID: 8474205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The erosion of Roe v. Wade; do minors have any rights?
    Sourial WH
    Whittier Law Rev; 1992; 13(1):285-332. PubMed ID: 11656215
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Abortion compromise -- inevitable and impossible.
    Law SA
    Univ Ill Law Rev; 1992; 25(4):921-41. PubMed ID: 11656296
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. A thorn in the side of privacy: the need for reassessment of the constitutional right to abortion.
    Kunz KA
    Marquette Law Rev; 1987; 70(3):534-71. PubMed ID: 11655884
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. S.J. Res. 110: Human Life Federalism Amendment.
    Hatch OG
    Congr Rec (Dly Ed); 1981 Sep; 127(131):S10194-8. PubMed ID: 11658572
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. When is a pregnant minor mature? When is an abortion in her best interests? The Ohio Supreme Court applies Ohio's Abortion Parental Notification Law: In re Jane Doe 1.
    Stuhlbarg SF
    Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1992; 60(3):907-61. PubMed ID: 11651633
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Irish abortion: seeking refuge in a jurisprudence of doubt and delegation.
    Fox M; Murphy T
    J Law Soc; 1992; 19(4):454-66. PubMed ID: 11656231
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Current technology affecting Supreme Court abortion jurisprudence.
    Buckley M
    NY Law Sch Law Rev; 1982; 27(4):1221-60. PubMed ID: 11651778
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. The Akron decision: a pragmatic politician's parody of Solomon.
    Noonan JT
    Hum Life Rev; 1983; 9(3):5-18. PubMed ID: 11655719
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.