204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11649225)
1. Mother v. her unborn child: where should Texas draw the line?
Locke NJ
Houst Law Rev; 1987 May; 24(3):549-76. PubMed ID: 11649225
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Resisting the temptation to turn medical recommendations into judicial orders: a reconsideration of court-ordered surgery for pregnant women.
Scott C
Ga State Univ Law Rev; 1994 May; 10(4):615-89. PubMed ID: 11656420
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
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. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Court-ordered surgery for the protection of a viable fetus: Jefferson v. Griffin Spalding County Hospital Authority, 247 Ga. 86, 274 S.E.2d 457 (1981).
Manner RL
West New Engl Law Rev; 1982; 5(1):125-48. PubMed ID: 11649638
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Judicial intervention in pregnancy.
Martin S; Coleman M
McGill Law J; 1995 Aug; 40(4):947-91. PubMed ID: 11654475
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Re Baby R: a comment on fetal apprehension.
Dawson TB
Can J Women Law; 1990; 4(1):265-75. PubMed ID: 11649295
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. A feminist response to 'Unborn child abuse: contemplating legal solution.
Dawson TB
Can J Fam Law; 1991; 9(2):157-76. PubMed ID: 11656495
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The fetus and the law--whose life is it anyway?
Gallagher J
Ms; 1984 Sep; 13(3):62, 64, 66+. PubMed ID: 11655606
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
