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.
167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11644060)
1. June 8, 1982, letter of Judge John Baker to Anonymous Person. Baker JG Issues Law Med; 1986 Jul; 2(1):81-3. PubMed ID: 11644060 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Baby Doe cases: compromise and moral dilemma. Haddon PA Emory Law J; 1985; 34(3-4):545-615. PubMed ID: 11658790 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Life and death decisions in the nursery: standards and procedures for withholding lifesaving treatment from infants. Smith SR NY Law Sch Law Rev; 1982; 27(4):1125-86. PubMed ID: 11651775 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Law, medicine, and morality: the cases of Infant Doe and Pamela Hamilton. Klinefelter D J Law Relig; 1984; 2(2):413-27. PubMed ID: 11651848 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The legacy of Infant Doe. Cosby MG Bayl Law Rev; 1982; 34(4):699-715. PubMed ID: 11651747 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. The outer limits of parental autonomy: withholding medical treatment from children. Vorys YV Ohio State Law J; 1981; 43(3):813-29. PubMed ID: 11658709 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Defective newborns: inconsistent application of legal principles emphasized by the Infant Doe case. Baumgardner KL Tex Tech Law Rev; 1983; 14(3):569-91. PubMed ID: 11651729 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Last rights: an analysis of refusal and withholding of treatment cases. Brant J Miss Law Rev; 1981; 46(2):337-70. PubMed ID: 11651657 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Medical treatment of defective newborns: an answer to the "Baby Doe" dilemma. Shapiro RS Harvard J Legis; 1983; 20(1):137-52. PubMed ID: 11651781 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Beyond state intervention in the family: for Baby Jane Doe. Minow M Univ Mich J Law Reform; 1985; 18(4):933-1014. PubMed ID: 11655183 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The treatment of handicapped newborns: is there a role for law? Burt RA Issues Law Med; 1986 Jan; 1(4):279-91. PubMed ID: 11651814 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The ultimate parental nightmare: should our 'bad baby' live or die? Lyon J Washington Post; 1985 Feb; ():C1, C2. PubMed ID: 11646289 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Non-treatment in the best interests of the child: a case commentary of Couture-Jacquet v. Montreal Children's Hospital. Keyserlingk EW McGill Law J; 1987 Mar; 32(2):413-36. PubMed ID: 11649873 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The roles of the family in making health care decisions for incompetent patients. Francis LP Utah Law Rev; 1992; 1992(3):861-90. PubMed ID: 11656535 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Natural death: an alternative in New Jersey. Levant S Georgetown Law J; 1985 Jun; 73(5):1331-54. PubMed ID: 11651811 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Decision-making in terminal care: the days of one's life and the life of one's days. Dickens BM Sask Law Rev; 1986-1987; 51(1):1-22. PubMed ID: 11652507 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]