293 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11649801)
1. Reproductive technology and the procreation rights of the unmarried.
Harv Law Rev; 1985 Jan; 98(3):669-85. PubMed ID: 11649801
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Sexuality, privacy and the new biology.
Smith GP; Iraola R
Marquette Law Rev; 1984; 67(2):263-91. PubMed ID: 11658703
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Legislative guidelines to govern in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer.
Williams HE
Santa Clara Law Rev; 1986; 26(2):495-518. PubMed ID: 11651873
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Artificial conception: legislative approaches.
Krause HD
Fam Law Q; 1985; 19(3):185-206. PubMed ID: 11658752
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Alternative means of reproduction: virgin territory for legislation.
Lorio KV
LA Law Rev; 1984 Jul; 44(6):1641-76. PubMed ID: 11658743
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The use of in vitro fertilization: is there a right to bear or beget a child by any available medical means?
Eccles MR
Pepperdine Law Rev; 1985; 12(4):1033-57. PubMed ID: 11655769
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. A medical advancement in search of a legal theory--artificial insemination by donor and the law.
Baylson MM
Semin Reprod Endocrinol; 1987 Feb; 5(1):69-80. PubMed ID: 11658912
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The itinerant embryo and the neo-nativity scene: bifurcating biological maternity.
O'Brien S
Utah Law Rev; 1987; 1987-1(1):1-33. PubMed ID: 11658919
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Test tube babies: legal issues raised by in vitro fertilization.
Flannery DM
Georgetown Law J; 1979 Aug; 67(6):1295-345. PubMed ID: 11664058
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Artificial conception: the challenge for family law.
Wadlington W
Va Law Rev; 1983 Apr; 69(3):465-514. PubMed ID: 11651807
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. A rejoinder.
Palmer LI
Jurimetrics; 1994; 35(1):51-4. PubMed ID: 11660336
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Model human reproduction technologies and surrogacy act.
Abbas J
Iowa Law Rev; 1987 May; 72(4):943-1013. PubMed ID: 11659499
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Modern reproductive technology and motherhood: the search for common ground and the recognition of difference.
Birck ML
Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1994; 62(4):1623-57. PubMed ID: 11660067
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Finding fathers: artificial insemination, lesbians, and the law.
Arnup K
Can J Women Law; 1994; 7(1):97-115. PubMed ID: 11660009
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The new Spanish law: a model for Europe?
Varela MJ; Stolcke V
Reprod Genet Eng; 1989; 2(3):231-5. PubMed ID: 11652006
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. My body, my life, my baby, my rights.
Levine R
Human Rights; 1984; 12(1):27-29, 46-50. PubMed ID: 11649863
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Who are the parents of biotechnological children?
Palmer LI
Jurimetrics; 1994; 35(1):17-29. PubMed ID: 11660334
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Reconceiving privacy: relationships and reproductive technology.
Rao R
UCLA Law Rev; 1998 Apr; 45(4):1077-123. PubMed ID: 11660817
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Parenthood by pure intention: assisted reproduction and the functional approach to parentage.
Storrow RF
Hastings Law J; 2002 Mar; 53(3):597-679. PubMed ID: 12680380
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Prohibiting payments to surrogate mothers: love's labor lost and the constitutional right to privacy.
Bradley TS
John Marshall Law Rev; 1987; 20(4):715-45. PubMed ID: 11650095
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
