doi: 10.1177/0098858815591510.
Medical Evidence and Expertise in Abortion Jurisprudence
- PMID: 26237984
- DOI: 10.1177/0098858815591510
Item in Clipboard
Medical Evidence and Expertise in Abortion Jurisprudence
Am J Law Med.
2015.
Abstract
For another thing, the division of medical opinion about the matter at most means uncertainty, a factor that signals the presence of risk, not its absence. That division here involves highly qualified knowledgeable experts on both sides of the issue.--Stenberg v. Carhart, 2000. While we find no reliable data to measure the phenomenon, it seems unexceptionable to conclude some women come to regret their choice to abort the infant life they once created and sustained.--Gonzales v. Carhart, 2007.
Similar articles
-
Fourteenth Amendment unenumerated rights jurisprudence: an essay in response to Stenberg v. Carhart.Harv J Law Public Policy. 2001;24(3):815-39. Harv J Law Public Policy. 2001. PMID: 16594113 No abstract available.
-
Stenberg v Carhart: a divided US Supreme Court debates partial birth abortion.Mod Law Rev. 2001 Jul;64(4):618-27. doi: 10.1111/1468-2230.00342. Mod Law Rev. 2001. PMID: 16538739 No abstract available.
-
Infanticide or civil rights for women: did the Supreme Court go too far in Stenberg v. Carhart?Houst Law Rev. 2002 Summer;39(2):529-66. Houst Law Rev. 2002. PMID: 15212035 No abstract available.
-
Abortion and birth control--right to abortion and regulation thereof: the United States Supreme Court invalidates a statute banning partial birth abortions: Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000).N D Law Rev. 2001;77(2):345-73. N D Law Rev. 2001. PMID: 12956123 No abstract available.
-
From arguments to Supreme Court opinions in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.PS (Wash DC). 1993 Mar;26(1):53-8. PS (Wash DC). 1993. PMID: 12085874 Review. No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Medical