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.
201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11649199)
1. Lack of consent although informed: fetal neglect. Reece SA; Reece EA Med Trial Tech Q; 1985; 32(2):130-44. PubMed ID: 11649199 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The right to begin life with sound body and mind: fetal patients and conflicts with their mothers. Dougherty CJ Univ Detroit Law Rev; 1985; 63(1-2):89-117. PubMed ID: 11659281 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Fetal rights and maternal rights: is there a conflict? Rogers S Can J Women Law; 1986; 1(2):456-69. PubMed ID: 11651100 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The creation of fetal rights: conflicts with women's constitutional rights to liberty, privacy, and equal protection. Johnsen DE Yale Law J; 1986 Jan; 95(3):599-625. PubMed ID: 11658701 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Prenatal caretaking: limits of state intervention with and without Roe. Rush SE Univ Fla Law Rev; 1987; 39(1):55-112. PubMed ID: 11658954 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Apprehending the fetus en ventre sa mere: a study in judicial sleight of hand. Tateishi SA Sask Law Rev; 1989; 53(1):113-41. PubMed ID: 11656024 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Medical choices during pregnancy: whose decision is it anyway? Goldberg S Rutgers Law Rev; 1989; 41(2):591-623. PubMed ID: 11649263 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Forced medical treatment of pregnant women: "compelling each to live as seems good to the rest. Nelson LJ; Buggy BP; Weil CJ Hastings Law J; 1986 May; 37(5):703-63. PubMed ID: 11655855 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Of gametes and guardians: the impropriety of appointing guardians ad litem for fetuses and embryos. Goldberg S Wash Law Rev; 1991 Apr; 66(2):503-44. PubMed ID: 11656073 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Neglect of the unborn child: an analysis based on law in the United States. Bross DC; Meredyth A Child Abuse Negl; 1979; 3(Part 2):643-50. PubMed ID: 11658678 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Personhood: current legal views. Larson EJ Second Opin; 1990 Jul; 14():41-53. PubMed ID: 11650425 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Umbilical cords: the new drug connection. Phillips M Buffalo Law Rev; 1992; 40(2):525-66. PubMed ID: 11651461 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The maternal abdominal wall: a fortress against fetal health care? Phelan JP South Calif Law Rev; 1991 Nov; 65(1):461-90. PubMed ID: 11645842 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. To be or not to be: protecting the unborn's potentiality of life. Parness JA; Pritchard SK Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1982; 51(2):257-98. PubMed ID: 11658559 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The legal status of the unborn after Webster. Parness JA Dickinson Law Rev; 1990; 95(1):1-22. PubMed ID: 11659394 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Forced obstetrical intervention: a charter analysis. Grant I Univ Tor Law J; 1989; 39(3):217-57. PubMed ID: 11656008 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Power and procreation: state interference in pregnancy. Hanigsberg JE Ottawa Law Rev; 1991; 23(1):35-70. PubMed ID: 11656189 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]