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.
170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11644864)
1. Widow's case raises issues of informed consent. Dyer C BMJ; 1996 Nov; 313(7069):1351. PubMed ID: 11644864 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. R v. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, ex parte Blood. Great Britain. England. Court of Appeal, Civil Division All Engl Law Rep; 1997 Feb; [1997] 2():687-704. PubMed ID: 11648631 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Infertility treatment: posthumous use of sperm -- R. v. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, ex parte D.B. Grubb A Med Law Rev; 1996; 4(3):329-35. PubMed ID: 11657156 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Widow's fight for husband's sperm. Intervention by BMA's ethics committee was ill judged. Winston R BMJ; 1996 Dec; 313(7070):1477. PubMed ID: 8973240 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Bending the statutory rules: the case of Mrs. Blood. Delany L Health Care Anal; 1997 Sep; 5(3):238-240, 243. PubMed ID: 11645343 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Widow appeals over denial of right to husband's sperm. Brahams D Lancet; 1996 Oct; 348(9035):1164. PubMed ID: 11656546 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. British widow fights to have her dead husband's baby. Dyer C BMJ; 1996 Oct; 313(7064):1035. PubMed ID: 11644843 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Diane Blood and the HFEA. Bull Med Ethics; 1997 Jan; No. 124():2. PubMed ID: 11655053 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. R v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Ex parte Blood. 17 October 1996. Health Care Anal; 1997 Jun; 5(2):157-60. PubMed ID: 10184712 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. More questions than answers? R v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte Blood The Times 7th February 1997. Treece SJ; Savas D Med Law Int; 1997; 3(1):75-81. PubMed ID: 16121440 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinics admit they take sperm from dead men. Cohen P New Sci; 1996 Nov; 152(2058):5. PubMed ID: 11660286 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. To correct the record: the continuing, troubling, inaccurate accounts of my case. Blood D Hum Reprod Genet Ethics; 2004; 10(1):2-4. PubMed ID: 15459989 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Regulating the new reproductive technologies: a cross-channel comparison. Latham M Med Law Int; 1998; 3(2-3):89-115. PubMed ID: 11657600 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. A role model of rigidity. Lancet; 1996 Nov; 348(9037):1253. PubMed ID: 8909371 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Legal responses to some of the new developments in reproductive technologies, Part.2: the case of Diane Blood. Scott A Hum Reprod Genet Ethics; 2002; 8(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 11962523 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Posthumous taking and use of sperm: A.B. v. Attorney General of Victoria. Grubb A Med Law Rev; 1999; 7(1):84-7. PubMed ID: 11658028 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Law and ethics of gamete storage and informed consent as illustrated by the Diane Blood case, and an appraisal of international standards. Yap LB Br J Fam Plann; 1999 Jan; 24(4):164-7. PubMed ID: 10023103 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Government reviews law on "posthumous conceptions". Dyer C BMJ; 1997 Oct; 315(7112):834. PubMed ID: 9353499 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The sperminator. Andrews LB N Y Times Mag; 1999 Mar; ():62-5. PubMed ID: 11648102 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]