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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

404 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11651891)

  • 1. What ever happened to Baby Jane...Doe?
    Jolly CM
    West State Univ Law Rev; 1987; 14(2):543-9. PubMed ID: 11651891
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Supreme Court and Baby Jane Doe.
    Drinan RF
    America (NY); 1986 Mar; 154(9):180-2. PubMed ID: 11658666
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Baby Doe's new guardians: federal policy brings nontreatment decisions out of hiding.
    Born MA
    KY Law J; 1986-1987; 75(3):659-75. PubMed ID: 11651897
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Bowen v. American Hospital Association: federal regulation is powerless to save Baby Doe.
    Cantrell DF
    Indiana Law Rev; 1986; 19(4):1199-218. PubMed ID: 11650766
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. "New" rights for handicapped newborns: Baby Doe and beyond.
    Phillips CA
    Calif West Law Rev; 1985; 22(1):127-58. PubMed ID: 11658804
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Forgoing treatment of critically ill newborns and the legal legacy of Baby Doe.
    Nelson LJ
    Clin Ethics Rep; 1992; 6(2):1-6. PubMed ID: 11652072
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Infant Doe and Baby Jane Doe: medical treatment of the handicapped newborn.
    Horan DJ; Balch BJ
    Linacre Q; 1985 Feb; 52(1):45-76. PubMed ID: 11651855
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Baby Jane Doe.
    America (NY); 1983 Nov; 149(16):302-3. PubMed ID: 11658405
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. If not that way, what way?
    America (NY); 1986 Jul; 155(2):21. PubMed ID: 11658787
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Baby Jane Doe ruling upheld; suit fails.
    Curran M
    Ob Gyn News; 1983 Dec 15-31; 18(24):8. PubMed ID: 11653509
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Another court challenge predicted following revised 'Baby Doe' rule.
    Med World News; 1983 Jul; 24(14):54, 59. PubMed ID: 11645668
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The legislative response to Infant Doe.
    Kuzma AL
    Indiana Law J; 1983-1984; 59(3):377-416. PubMed ID: 11658614
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Baby Jane Doe: readers' responses.
    Marzen TJ; Uddo BJ
    America (NY); 1984 Feb; 150(5):93-4. PubMed ID: 11658403
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Abortion's shrinking majority.
    Murphy J
    Time; 1986 Jun; 127(25):30-1. PubMed ID: 11645638
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Recent governmental action regarding the treatment of seriously ill newborns.
    Lawton SE; Carder EB; Weisman AW
    J Coll Univ Law; 1985; 11(4):405-16. PubMed ID: 11651864
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Ruling on Baby Doe: impact limited.
    Malcolm AH
    N Y Times Web; 1986 Jun; ():A16. PubMed ID: 11646486
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. High court upsets U.S. intervention on infants' lives.
    Taylor S
    N Y Times Web; 1986 Jun; ():1. PubMed ID: 11646482
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Beyond state intervention in the family: for Baby Jane Doe.
    Minow M
    Univ Mich J Law Reform; 1985; 18(4):933-1014. PubMed ID: 11655183
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 'Baby Doe' proposed reg suffers setback in court.
    Med World News; 1983 Dec; 24(23):27. PubMed ID: 11645566
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Decision to pursue Baby Doe case born in confusion at HHS.
    Barringer F
    Washington Post; 1983 Dec; ():A19. PubMed ID: 11646342
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.