312 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11651494)
1. Restricting surrogacy to married couples: a constitutional problem? The married-parent requirement in the Uniform Status of Children of Assisted Conception Act.
Massie AM
Hastings Constit Law Q; 1991; 18(3):487-540. PubMed ID: 11651494
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Gestational surrogacy: unsettling state parentage law and surrogacy policy.
Hofheimer A
Rev Law Soc Change; 1992; 19(3):571-616. PubMed ID: 11659977
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Uniform Status of Children of Assisted Conception Act.
;
Fam Law Rep (Wash D C); 1989 Feb; 15(16):2009-16. PubMed ID: 11659181
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Re-expressing parenthood.
Bartlett KT
Yale Law J; 1988 Dec; 98(2):293-340. PubMed ID: 11650821
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Alternative birth technologies: legal challenges.
Capron AM
Univ Calif Davis Law Rev; 1987; 20(4):679-704. PubMed ID: 11659041
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Egg donation, motherhood and state law reform: a commentary on Professor Palmer's proposals.
Strouse DS
Jurimetrics; 1994; 35(1):31-49. PubMed ID: 11660335
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Conceiving for cash; is it legal?: a survey of the laws applicable to surrogate motherhood.
Taylor S
N Y Law School Hum Rights Annu; 1987; 4(Part 2):413-44. PubMed ID: 11650203
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Artificial conception: legislative approaches.
Krause HD
Fam Law Q; 1985; 19(3):185-206. PubMed ID: 11658752
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Developing a concept of the modern "family": a proposed Uniform Surrogate Parenthood Act.
Mandler JJ
Georgetown Law J; 1985 Jun; 73(5):1283-329. PubMed ID: 11651810
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Legislative regulation of surrogacy and reproductive technology.
Shultz MM
Univ San Francisco Law Rev; 1994; 28(3):613-25. PubMed ID: 11655178
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Who are the parents of biotechnological children?
Palmer LI
Jurimetrics; 1994; 35(1):17-29. PubMed ID: 11660334
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Austria: a legal ban on surrogate mothers and fathers?
Bernat E; Straka U
J Fam Law; 1992-1993 Spring; 31(2):267-82. PubMed ID: 11660068
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Frustrated intentions and binding biology: seeking AID (Artificial Insemination by Donor) in the law.
Schiff AR
Duke Law J; 1994 Dec; 44(3):524-70. PubMed ID: 11660686
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. How (not) to think about surrogacy and other reproductive innovations.
Shapiro MH
Univ San Francisco Law Rev; 1994; 28(3):647-80. PubMed ID: 11655181
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Legal aspects of artificial human reproduction: can the law afford to play ostrich?
Clapshaw D
Auckl Univ Law Rev; 1982 Jun; 4(3):254-72. PubMed ID: 11658651
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
