Reproductive Health Hazards in the Workplace: Guidelines for Policy Development and Implementation

References

• International Union, UAW v. Johnson Controls, c111 S. Ct. 1196 (1991).
   Google Scholar
• Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908).
   Google Scholar
• Becker ME. From Muller v. Oregon to fetal vulnerability policies, 53U. Chicago Law Rev. 1219 (1986).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. Reproductive Health Hazards in the Workplace. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, OTA-BA-266; 1985: 235–76.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels CR, Paul M, Rosofslcy R. Health, equity, and reproductive risks in the workplace. J Public Health Policy. 1990; 11: 449–61.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bertin JE. Work and family. In: Leftcourt CA, Hillman AS (eds). Women and the Law. 3rd ed. New York: Clark Boardman Callaghan, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.
   Google Scholar
• Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, 92 Stat. 2076, 42 U.S.C. 2000e (k).
   Google Scholar
• Blanco AC. Fetal protection programs under Title VII—rebutting the procreation presumption. 46 U. Pittsburgh Law Rev. 755 (1985).
   Google Scholar
• O'Brien CN, Reder MEK, Madek GA, Ferrera GR. Employer fetal protection policies at work: balancing reproductive hazards with Title VII rights. 74 Marquette LawRev. 147 (1991).
   Google Scholar
• Clauss CA, Berzon M, Bertin J. litigating reproductive and developmentalhealth in the aftermath of UAW versus Johnson Con-trols. Environ Health Perspect. 1993; 101 (suppl 2):205–20.
   Google Scholar
• Annas GJ. Fetal protection and employment discriminationtheJohnson Controls case. N Engl J Med. 1991; 325: 740–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Labor, Women's Bureau. Women workers: outlook to 2005. Facts on working women no. 92-1.Washington, D.C.: Women's Bureau, January 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Colie CF. Male mediated teratogenesis. Reprod Toxicol. 1993; 7: 3–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wyrobek AJ. Methods and concepts in detecting abnormal reproductiveoutcomes of paternal origin. Reprod Toxicol. 1993; 7: 3–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paul ME (ed). Occupational and Environmental Reproductive Hazards: A Guide for Clinicians. Baltimore, Maryland: Williams and Wilkins, 1993, pp3–88.
   Google Scholar
• Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970,29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Adminis-tration. 29 C.F.R. part 1910. Occupational exposure to 2-methoxy ethanol, 2-ethoxy ethanol, and their acetates (glycol ethers); proposedrule. Federal Register. 1993; 58: 15526–15632.
   Google Scholar
• Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Hazard CommunicationStandard, 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1919.1200 (1990).
   Google Scholar
• Paul M, Kurtz S. Analysis of reproductive health hazard informationon material safety data sheets for lead and the ethylene glycolethers. Am J hid Med. 1994; 251: 403–15.
   Google Scholar
• Allan RE. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW, et al. v. Johnson Controls, Inc. Part I: overview. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1991; 52:A440–A441.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• O'Brien CN, Reder MEK. Strategies for implementing workplace reproductive and health programs. 19J Legislation 97 (1993).
   Google Scholar
• Robinson JC, Giacomini MK. A reallocation of rights in industries with reproductive health hazards. Millbank Q. 1992; 70: 587–603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertin JE, Henifin MS. Legal issues in women's occupational health. In: Stromberg AH, Larwood L, Gutek BA (eds). Women and Work: An Annual Review, Vol. 2. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications; 1987, pp93–115.
   Google Scholar
• Bertin JE, Werby EA. Legal and policy issues. In: Paul ME (ed). Occupational and Environmental Reproductive Hazards: A Guide for Clinicians. Baltimore, Maryland: Williams and Wilkins; 1993, pp150–62.
   Google Scholar
• Pond v. Oliver, 490 N.Y.S. 2d 358 (1985).
   Google Scholar
• Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (PL 101-336), 42 U.S.C. 1201, et seq.
   Google Scholar
• Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (P1 103-3), 5 U.S.C. 6381-6387.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Report of the Teratology Policy Workgroup. Excerpted in: Inside EPA Weekly Report. July 5,1985; 6: 11–3.
   Google Scholar
• Koeter HBWM. Relevance of parameters related to fertility and reproduction in toxicity testing. In: Mattison DR (ed). ReproductiveToxicology. New York: Alan R. Liss, 1983, pp 81–6.
   Google Scholar
• Security National Bank v. Chloride Industrial Battery, 602 F Supp. 294 (D. Kan. 1985).
   Google Scholar
• Jarvis v. Providence Hospital, 178 Mich. App. 586,444 N.W. 2d 236 (1989).
   Google Scholar
• Rappaport SM. Threshold limit values, permissible exposure lim-its, and feasibility: the bases for exposure limits in the United States. Am J Ind Med. 1993; 23: 683–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control. NIOSH recommendations for occupationalsafety and health standards. MMWR. 1988; 37(suppl S-7):1–29.
   Google Scholar
• Hallenbeck WH, Cunningham KM. Quantitative Risk Assessment for Environmental and Occupational Health. Chelsea, Michigan: Lewis Publishers, 1988, pp 40-41,46–47.
   Google Scholar
• Kimmel CA, Wellington DG, Farland W, et al. Overview of a workshopon quantitative models for developmental toxicity risk as-sessment. Environ Health Perspect. 1989; 79: 209–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar