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.
463 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11652997)
1. Child abuse by whom? -- Parental rights and judicial competency determinations: the Baby K and Baby Terry cases. Bopp J; Coleson RE Ohio North Univ Law Rev; 1994; 20(4):821-46. PubMed ID: 11652997 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. A legal challenge to the refusal to provide inappropriate treatment: the case of Baby K. Watson SB Clin Ethics Rep; 1994; 8(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 11652775 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. In re Baby K. U.S. District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division Fed Suppl; 1993 Jul; 832():1022-31. PubMed ID: 11648613 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Killing "the handicapped" -- before and after birth. Field MA Harv Womens Law J; 1993; 16():79-138. PubMed ID: 11652872 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Commentary: what is really at stake in Baby K? A response to Ellen Flannery. Clayton EW J Law Med Ethics; 1995; 23(1):13-4. PubMed ID: 11644715 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Medical futility: a futile concept? Shiner K Wash Lee Law Rev; 1996; 53(2):803-48. PubMed ID: 11656798 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. When a patient demands what health care providers deem foolish: medical-ethical analysis of the case of Baby K. Peabody JL Clin Ethics Rep; 1993; 7(4):1-12. PubMed ID: 11653093 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Delivery room resuscitation of the high-risk infant: a conflict of rights. Cooper R Cathol Lawyer; 1990; 33(4):325-60. PubMed ID: 11659422 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Hospital appeals decision ordering treatment for baby missing a brain. Greenhouse L N Y Times Web; 1993 Sep; ():A10. PubMed ID: 11646990 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Anencephalic baby's right to life. McCarthy M Lancet; 1993 Oct; 342(8876):919. PubMed ID: 11643245 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. "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]
13. Stopping treatment on grounds of futility: a role for institutional policy. Stell LK St Louis Univ Public Law Rev; 1992; 11(2):481-97. PubMed ID: 11652704 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Natural death: an alternative in New Jersey. Levant S Georgetown Law J; 1985 Jun; 73(5):1331-54. PubMed ID: 11651811 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Negotiating towards death. Winkelstein P Shma; 1996 Feb; 26(508):3-4. PubMed ID: 11653371 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Withholding life-prolonging medical treatment from the institutionalized person--who decides? Corbett KA; Raciti RM New Engl J Prison Law; 1976; 3(1):47-83. PubMed ID: 11664738 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Withholding treatment from defective newborns: who decides and on what criteria? Longino PH Univ Kans Law Rev; 1983; 31(3):377-407. PubMed ID: 11658479 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. When physicians balk at futile care: implications of the disability rights laws. Peters PG Northwest Univ Law Rev; 1997; 91(3):798-864. PubMed ID: 11660527 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]