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.
117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 759352)
1. "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]
2. Colautti v. Franklin: the Court questions the use of "viability" in abortion statutes. Bartleman A West State Univ Law Rev; 1979; 6(2):311-323. PubMed ID: 11662770 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Colautti v. Franklin. 9 Jan 1979. U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania US Supreme Court Rep; 1979; 439():379-409. PubMed ID: 11646023 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Late abortion and technological advances in fetal viability. Fam Plann Perspect; 1985; 17(4):160-4. PubMed ID: 3842806 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Abortion legislation after Webster v. Reproductive Health Services: model statutes and commentaries. Smolin DM Cumberland Law Rev; 1989-1990; 20(1):71-163. PubMed ID: 15999438 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. The Supreme Court and abortion: 1. Upholding constitutional principles. Noonan JT Hastings Cent Rep; 1980 Dec; 10(6):14-6. PubMed ID: 7461954 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services: a path to constitutional equalibrium. Chopko ME Campbell Law Rev; 1990; 12(2):181-220. PubMed ID: 11656527 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
16. Mississippi physicians' attitudes toward the Supreme Court abortion decision. Murray PT; Jew H J Miss State Med Assoc; 1974 Jul; 15(7):291-4. PubMed ID: 4841121 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Privacy II: state attempts to regulate abortion. Prall S Annu Surv Am Law; 1988; 1(2):385-427. PubMed ID: 11652657 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey: constitutional principles and political turbulence. Bigel AI Univ Dayton Law Rev; 1993; 18(3):733-62. PubMed ID: 11659777 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Death of a baby: inquiry in Glasgow. Br Med J; 1969 Jun; 2(5658):704-5. PubMed ID: 5783138 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]