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.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Journal Abstract Search
281 related items for PubMed ID: 16450474
21. Abortion in America. Shostak AB. Futurist; 1991; 25(4):20-4. PubMed ID: 16145782 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Minor rights: the adolescent abortion cases. Guggenheim M. Hofstra Law Rev; 2002; 30(3):589-646. PubMed ID: 15212070 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Parental consent to abortion: how enforcement can vary. Lewin T. N Y Times Web; 1992 May 28; ():A1, B8. PubMed ID: 11647920 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. N.H. approves abortion consent bill. Ferdinand P. Washington Post; 2003 May 30; ():A5. PubMed ID: 14610776 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey v. Farmer. New Jersey. Supreme Court. Wests Atl Report; 2000 May 30; 762():620-47. PubMed ID: 16477733 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. North Florida Women's Health Services v. State. Florida. Supreme Court. Wests South Report; 2003 May 30; 866():612-74. PubMed ID: 16479690 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. The Casey undue burden standard: problems predicted and encountered, and the split over the Salerno test. Burdick R. Hastings Constit Law Q; 1996 May 30; 23():825-76. PubMed ID: 16086482 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Justices deadlocked on state laws restricting minors' access to abortion. Taylor S. N Y Times Web; 1987 Dec 15; ():B16. PubMed ID: 11646635 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Inverting the viability test for abortion law. Ching B. Womens Rights Law Report; 2000 Dec 15; 22(1):37-45. PubMed ID: 16281341 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. The erosion of Roe v. Wade; do minors have any rights? Sourial WH. Whittier Law Rev; 1992 Dec 15; 13(1):285-332. PubMed ID: 11656215 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Winter count: taking stock of abortion rights after Casey and Carhart. Borgmann CE. Fordham Urban Law J; 2004 Mar 15; 31(3):675-716. PubMed ID: 16700116 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Casey and its impact on abortion regulation. Moses MF. Fordham Urban Law J; 2004 Mar 15; 31(3):805-15. PubMed ID: 16700123 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Abortion rights of minors weighed. Taylor S. N Y Times Web; 1987 Nov 04; ():B32. PubMed ID: 11647378 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Splitting the baby: when can a pregnant minor obtain an abortion without parental consent? The Ex parte Anonymous cases (Alabama 2001). Rosenberg SP. Conn Law Rev; 2002 Nov 04; 34(3):1109-41. PubMed ID: 15212029 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Abortion rights of young women: the Supreme Court attacks the most vulnerable. Heller S. Washburn Law J; 1990 Nov 04; 30(1):15-28. PubMed ID: 11659579 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Tribe's judicious feminism -- Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes. Allen AL. Stanford Law Rev; 1991 Nov 04; 44(1):179-203. PubMed ID: 11659573 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Constitutionalizing Roe, Casey and Carhart: a legislative due-process anti-discrimination principle that gives constitutional content to the "undue burden" standard of review applied to abortion control legislation. Van Detta JA. South Calif Rev Law Womens Stud; 2001 Nov 04; 10(2):211-92. PubMed ID: 16485363 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]