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.
204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11647247)
1. Israeli court gives wife right to embryos. Greenberg J N Y Times Web; 1996 Sep; ():A10. PubMed ID: 11647247 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Davis v. Davis: what about future disputes? Feliciano T Conn Law Rev; 1993; 26(1):305-53. PubMed ID: 11660034 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The implications of Davis v. Davis for reproductive rights analysis. Prygoski PJ Tenn Law Rev; 1994; 61(2):609-46. PubMed ID: 11652933 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Halakhic approaches to the resolution of disputes concerning the disposition of preembryos. Breitowitz YA Tradition; 1996; 31(1):64-91. PubMed ID: 11654662 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Israeli court rules on right to motherhood. Fishman RH Lancet; 1996 Oct; 348(9033):1024. PubMed ID: 11660251 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. No ABA embryo policy. Washington Post; 1998 Feb; ():A5. PubMed ID: 11647577 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Davis v. Davis: the applicability of privacy and property rights to the disposition of frozen preembryos in intrafamilial disputes. Muller RJ Univ Toledo Law Rev; 1993; 24(3):763-804. PubMed ID: 11659794 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Judge rules woman who provides eggs has right to decide embryos' fate. N Y Times Web; 1995 Jan; ():B5. PubMed ID: 11647991 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Judge orders divorcing couple's frozen embryos destroyed. N Y Times Web; 1998 Sep; ():B6. PubMed ID: 11647640 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. American abortion law applied to new reproductive technology. Hemphill L Jurimetrics; 1992; 32(3):361-86. PubMed ID: 11656220 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Court gives ex-husband rights on use of embryos. Smothers R N Y Times Web; 1992 Jun; ():A1, A16. PubMed ID: 11647922 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Kass v. Kass. New York. Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department Wests N Y Suppl; 1997 Sep; 663():581-602. PubMed ID: 12041117 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prior agreements for disposition of frozen embryos. Robertson JA Ohio State Law J; 1990; 51(2):407-24. PubMed ID: 11652816 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Human reproduction: reflections on the Nachmani case. Dorner D Tex Int Law J; 2000; 35(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 12656085 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Posthumous reproduction. Robertson JA Indiana Law J; 1994; 69(4):1027-65. PubMed ID: 11653158 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. My egg, your sperm, whose preembryo? A proposal for deciding which party receives custody of frozen preembryos. Katz DA Va J Soc Policy Law; 1998; 5(3):623-74. PubMed ID: 11979606 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Massachusetts case is latest to ask court to decide fate of frozen embryos. Goldberg C N Y Times Web; 1999 Nov; ():A19. PubMed ID: 11647732 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The Solomon decision: a study of Davis v. Davis. Eget MM Mercer Law Rev; 1991; 42(3):1113-28. PubMed ID: 11651437 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Court says woman can bar embryos' use. N Y Times Web; 2001 Aug; ():B6. PubMed ID: 12155241 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. New turn in a couple's fight over embryos. N Y Times Web; 1990 May; ():21. PubMed ID: 11646769 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]