673 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8429970)
1. Abortion: a tangle of rights.
Curtin LL
Nurs Manage; 1993 Feb; 24(2):26, 28, 30-1. PubMed ID: 8429970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Abortion ethics.
Fromer MJ
Nurs Outlook; 1982 Apr; 30(4):234-40. PubMed ID: 7041095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Abortion: a tangle of rights.
Curtin LL
Dentistry; 1993 Feb; 24(2):26, 28, 30-31. PubMed ID: 11656257
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. [The origin of informed consent].
Mallardi V
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital; 2005 Oct; 25(5):312-27. PubMed ID: 16602332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Consent requirements for treatment of minors.
Thompson HA
Tex Med; 1989 Aug; 85(8):56-9. PubMed ID: 2763219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Competing ethical claims in abortion.
Davis AJ
Am J Nurs; 1980 Jul; 80(7):1359. PubMed ID: 6901588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reproductive rights in jeopardy. The Supreme Court upholds restrictions on abortion.
Gleeson K
ZPG Report; 1992 Sep; 24(4):7. PubMed ID: 12317715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Ethical issues in U.S. family planning policy.
Benshoof J
Draper Fund Rep; 1983 Aug; (12):11-2. PubMed ID: 12338973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Factors influencing the delivery of abortion services in Ontario: a descriptive study.
Ferris LE; McMain-Klein M; Iron K
Fam Plann Perspect; 1998; 30(3):134-8. PubMed ID: 9635262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Anti-abortion movement.
Wilson K
Plan Parent Rev; 1985; 5(2):4-6. PubMed ID: 12340405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Abortion and the law: the Supreme Court, privacy, and abortion.
Marsh FH
Adv Bioeth; 1997; 2():107-23. PubMed ID: 12348324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Consequences for patients of health care professionals' conscientious actions: the ban on abortions in South Australia.
Cannold L
J Med Ethics; 1994 Jun; 20(2):80-6. PubMed ID: 8083879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Defining minors' abortion rights.
Rhodes AM
MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs; 1988; 13(5):321. PubMed ID: 3139955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Abortion: the new debate.
Callahan D
Prim Care; 1986 Jun; 13(2):255-62. PubMed ID: 3523563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [The physician confronted with the application of abortion legislation].
Michaux P
Ouest Med; 1975; 28(13):945-52. PubMed ID: 12258971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
