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.
82 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 649132)
1. Illinois Court requires physician to try to save viable fetus. Horan DJ Hosp Prog; 1978 Jun; 59(6):6, 12. PubMed ID: 649132 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. The abortion cases. Rust ME ABA J; 1986 Feb; 72():50-3. PubMed ID: 11655726 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
6. 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]
7. Court affirms physician's choice of abortion procedure. Stiller JA Hosp Med Staff; 1979 Oct; 8(10):10-2. PubMed ID: 10244309 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Constitutional law--U.S. Supreme Court abortion decision clarifies concept of fetal viability and scope of physician's discretion in determining when viability is reached. Slandell H Temple Law Q; 1979; 52(4):1240-59. PubMed ID: 11664078 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. "Viability" revisits the Court in Colautti v. Franklin. Horan DV Hosp Prog; 1979 Feb; 60(2):18-21, 24. PubMed ID: 759352 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. State regulation of late abortion and the physician's duty of care to the viable fetus. Wood MA; Hawkins LB Miss Law Rev; 1980; 45(3):394-422. PubMed ID: 11664113 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Rationalizing the abortion debate: legal rhetoric and the abortion controversy. Chemerinsky E Buffalo Law Rev; 1982; 31(1):107-64. PubMed ID: 11655711 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Roe! Doe! Where are you?: the effect of the Supreme Court's abortion decisions. Satris MJ Univ Calif Davis Law Rev; 1974; 7():432-56. PubMed ID: 11661108 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The limited moral significance of 'fetal viability'. Fost N; Chudwin D; Wikler D Hastings Cent Rep; 1980 Dec; 10(6):10-3. PubMed ID: 7461953 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The constitutionality of abortion on request in South Africa. McGregor M; Moore R E Law; 1995 Dec; 2(3):E3. PubMed ID: 16967565 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Abortion: are medicine and the law on a collision course? Pollner F Med World News; 1985 Jul; 26(13):66-68, 70, 73+. PubMed ID: 11645557 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Recent developments in the abortion area. Scanlan AL Cathol Lawyer; 1975; 21(4):315-21. PubMed ID: 11661372 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Judicial power and the right to life. Noonan JT Tablet; 1973 Apr; 227(6927):323-6. PubMed ID: 11660868 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]