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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11643931)

  • 1. Reponse to Freeman: the Stony Brook perspective.
    Newman G
    J Health Polit Policy Law; 1986; 11(2):295-6. PubMed ID: 11643931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Making decisions for the severely handicapped newborn.
    Freeman JM
    J Health Polit Policy Law; 1986; 11(2):285-96. PubMed ID: 3745841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Weber v. Stony Brook Hospital.
    New York. Court of Appeals
    North East Rep Second Ser; 1983 Oct; 456():1186-8. PubMed ID: 12041207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Infant Doe and Baby Jane Doe: medical treatment of the handicapped newborn.
    Horan DJ; Balch BJ
    Linacre Q; 1985 Feb; 52(1):45-76. PubMed ID: 11651855
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Introduction to the Baby Jane Doe papers.
    Fox DM
    J Health Polit Policy Law; 1986; 11(2):195-7. PubMed ID: 11643930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The future of Baby Doe.
    Singer P; Kuhse H
    New York Rev Books; 1984 Mar; 31(3):17-22. PubMed ID: 11658414
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Life-and-death lottery in the nursery.
    Hentoff N
    Washington Post; 1984 Apr; ():A21. PubMed ID: 11647767
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Infant care review committees: an effective approach to the Baby Doe dilemma?
    Shapiro RS; Barthel R
    Hastings Law J; 1986 May; 37(5):827-62. PubMed ID: 11655857
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Baby Jane Doe: stating a cause of action against the officious intermeddler.
    Vitiello M
    Hastings Law J; 1986 May; 37(5):863-908. PubMed ID: 11655858
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The legacy of Baby Doe: five perspectives.
    Ciulla JB
    Psychol Today; 1987 Jan; 21(1):70-71, 74-75. PubMed ID: 11658812
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Nat Hentoff on the babies Doe.
    McFadden JP; Hentoff N
    Hum Life Rev; 1984; 10(2):73-104. PubMed ID: 11651744
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Deciding whether the baby lives.
    Curran M
    Washington Post; 1985 May; ():Health Su-17. PubMed ID: 11646285
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Baby Doe and local option.
    Hentoff N
    Washington Post; 1984 Jun; ():A19. PubMed ID: 11646290
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Baby Jane Doe ruling upheld; suit fails.
    Curran M
    Ob Gyn News; 1983 Dec 15-31; 18(24):8. PubMed ID: 11653509
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 'Baby Doe' may be undone.
    Caplan AL
    N Y Times Web; 1985 Feb; ():23. PubMed ID: 11646288
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Withholding treatment from defective newborns: who decides and on what criteria?
    Longino PH
    Univ Kans Law Rev; 1983; 31(3):377-407. PubMed ID: 11658479
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Refusal of lifesaving treatment for minors.
    Annas GJ
    J Fam Law; 1984-1985; 23(2):217-40. PubMed ID: 11651846
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Should every Baby Doe die?
    Barringer F
    Washington Post; 1983 Nov; ():B5. PubMed ID: 11646281
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Withholding treatment from defective newborns: substituted judgment, informed consent, and the Quinlan decision.
    Sargeant KJ
    Gonzaga Law Rev; 1978; 13(3):781-811. PubMed ID: 11664980
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Decision to pursue Baby Doe case born in confusion at HHS.
    Barringer F
    Washington Post; 1983 Dec; ():A19. PubMed ID: 11646342
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.