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: 11648229)
1. Re S (Adult: Refusal of Medical Treatment). Great Britain. England. High Court of Justice, Family Division All Engl Law Rep; 1992 Oct; [1992]4():671-2. PubMed ID: 11648229 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Contemporary transatlantic developments concerning compelled medical treatment of pregnant women. Rossiter GP Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 1995 May; 35(2):132-8. PubMed ID: 7677674 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. In re A.C. District of Columbia. Court of Appeals, en banc Atl Report; 1990 Apr; 573():1235-64. PubMed ID: 11648191 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Commentary: no more jurisdiction over Jehovah. Goldblatt AD J Law Med Ethics; 1999; 27(2):190-3. PubMed ID: 11657466 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The constitutionality of court-ordered cesarean surgery: a threshold question. Levine EM Albany Law J Sci Technol; 1994; 4(2):229-309. PubMed ID: 12091921 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Court-ordered cesareans: can a pregnant woman refuse? Leavine BA Houst Law Rev; 1992; 29(1):185-218. PubMed ID: 11656666 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. In re A.C. District of Columbia. Court of Appeals Atl Report; 1987 Nov; 533():611-7. PubMed ID: 11648174 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Forced cesarean sections: do the ends justify the means? Drigotas EE North Carol Law Rev; 1991 Nov; 70(1):297-321. PubMed ID: 11651652 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Lives at stake: how to respond to a woman's refusal of cesarean surgery when she risks losing her child or her life. Tauer CA Health Prog; 1992 Sep; 73(3):18, 20-27. PubMed ID: 11652082 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Re T (Adult: Refusal of Medical Treatment). Great Britain. England. Court of Appeal, Civil Division All Engl Law Rep; 1992 Jul; [1992]4():649-70. PubMed ID: 11648226 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. In re A.C.: a court-ordered cesarean becomes precedent for nonconsensual organ harvesting. Sturgess RH Nova Law Rev; 1989; 13(2):649-69. PubMed ID: 11650356 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Medical treatment--refusal of medical treatment--adult--refusal on religions grounds: Re S (refusal of medical treatment). Lloyd H; Munby J; Brown SP; New Law J; 1992 Oct; 142(6573):1450-1. PubMed ID: 16184670 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Court-ordered cesarean sections: an example of the dangers of judicial involvement in medical decision making. Stanyer BT Gonzaga Law Rev; 1992-1993; 28(1):121-40. PubMed ID: 11654037 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Prenatal invasions and interventions: what's wrong with fetal rights? Gallagher J Harv Womens Law J; 1987; 10():9-58. PubMed ID: 11649954 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Furthering the inquiry: race, class, and culture in the forced medical treatment of pregnant women. Ikemoto LC Tenn Law Rev; 1992; 59(3):487-517. PubMed ID: 11652636 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Knowledge, practice, and power: court-ordered cesarean sections. Irwin S; Jordan B Med Anthropol Q; 1987 Sep; 1(3):319-34. PubMed ID: 11659066 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Toward guidelines for compelling cesarean surgery: of rights, responsibility, and decisional authenticity. Finer JJ Minn Law Rev; 1991 Dec; 76(2):239-94. PubMed ID: 11659551 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Jefferson v. Griffin Spalding County Hospital Authority. Georgia. Supreme Court South East Report Second Ser; 1981 Feb; 274():457-62. PubMed ID: 12041308 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Mercy Hospital v. Jackson. Maryland. Court of Special Appeals Atl Report; 1985 Apr; 489():1130-4. PubMed ID: 11648161 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]