605 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11651899)
1. Born to live or born to die: the handicapped newborn in New Jersey.
Sarno JJ
Seton Hall Legis J; 1987; 11(1):201-22. PubMed ID: 11651899
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Disabled newborns and the federal child abuse amendments: tenuous protection.
Smith SR
Hastings Law J; 1986 May; 37(5):765-825. PubMed ID: 11655856
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
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. The legacy of Infant Doe.
Cosby MG
Bayl Law Rev; 1982; 34(4):699-715. PubMed ID: 11651747
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Infant care review committees: an effective approach to the Baby Doe dilemma?
Shapiro RS; Barthel R
Hastings Law J; 1986 May; 37(5):827-62. PubMed ID: 11655857
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Model Procedures for Child Protective Service Agencies Responding to Reports of Withholding Medically Indicated Treatment from Disabled Infants with Life-Threatening Conditions.
Nicholson EB; Horowitz RM; Parry J; ;
Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep; 1986; 10(3):221-49. PubMed ID: 11651933
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Medical ethics in life and death.
Thompson R
Editor Res Rep; 1984 Feb; 1(8):147-68. PubMed ID: 11652477
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Balancing wishes with wisdom: sustaining infant life.
Wakefield-Fisher M
Nurs Health Care; 1987 Nov; 8(9):517-20. PubMed ID: 11644099
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The care of defective neonates, ethics committees and federal intervention.
Riga PJ
Linacre Q; 1984 Aug; 51(3):255-76. PubMed ID: 11649572
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Severely disabled newborns: to live or let die?
Jackson CC
J Leg Med; 1987 Mar; 8(1):135-76. PubMed ID: 11644153
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Treatment dilemmas for imperiled newborns: why quality of life counts.
Rhoden NK
South Calif Law Rev; 1985 Sep; 58(6):1283-347. PubMed ID: 11660412
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. A critique of Louisiana's approach to withholding medical treatment from defective newborns.
Goichman G
South Univ Law Rev; 1983; 9(2):157-84. PubMed ID: 11652508
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Nondiscrimination on the basis of handicap; procedures and guidelines relating to health care for handicapped infants.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Office of the Secretary
Fed Regist; 1984 Jan; 48(8):1622-54. PubMed ID: 11655570
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Baby Doe cases: compromise and moral dilemma.
Haddon PA
Emory Law J; 1985; 34(3-4):545-615. PubMed ID: 11658790
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
