SEARCH · Search PubMed
Results for “Doe v. Doe”
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
doe v. Doe: the wife's right to an abortion over her husband's objections.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Doe v. Doe. 3 Jul 1974.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
beal v. Doe, Maher v. Roe, and non-therapeutic abortions: the state does not have to pay the bill.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Parental preferences and selective abortion: a commentary on Roe v. Wade, Doe v. Bolton, and the shape of things to come.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton revisited in 1976 and 1977--reviewed?; revived?; revested?; reversed?; or revoked?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The culmination of the abortion reform movement--Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton: the compelling state interest test in substantive due process.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Honig v. Doe: the suspension and expulsion of handicapped students.
Public Law 94-142 provides for a free appropriate public education for all handicapped children, but does not address the issue of disciplining handicapped students. The result has been confusion and uncertainty, particularly concerning expulsion and suspension. The courts have been forced into this vacuum, acting as arbiters. The Supreme Court's ruling in Honig v. Doe will help to delineate the proper role of educators in the suspension and expulsion of handicapped students. This article examines that role and offers recommendations for school policies regarding the discipline of handicapped students.
Supreme Court issues decisions on sexual harassment. Burlington Industries v. Ellerth.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The HIV-infected health care provider. Doe v. Attorney General of the United States.
Doe demonstrates that once an employer enters into a relationship with an individual and thereafter determines that he or she may be disabled, the employer has the right to ask the individual questions about the possible disability when those questions are relevant to assessing his or her qualifications for continuing on the job. In fact, once a health care provider is on notice that an employee's or physician's disability may render the employee or physician no longer qualified, thereby potentially endangering patients, the provider is required to determine whether the person is qualified for the job. In these sensitive matters, employers must draw a fine line between unreasonably following up on every rumor on the one hand, and on the other hand investigating reliable information when there may indeed be a direct threat to patients.
Duty to warn; negligence; AIDS/HIV; surgeon: Doe v. Noe.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.