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.
471 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11655606)
1. The fetus and the law--whose life is it anyway? Gallagher J Ms; 1984 Sep; 13(3):62, 64, 66+. PubMed ID: 11655606 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. A feminist response to 'Unborn child abuse: contemplating legal solution. Dawson TB Can J Fam Law; 1991; 9(2):157-76. PubMed ID: 11656495 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The creation of fetal rights: conflicts with women's constitutional rights to liberty, privacy, and equal protection. Johnsen DE Yale Law J; 1986 Jan; 95(3):599-625. PubMed ID: 11658701 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Medical choices during pregnancy: whose decision is it anyway? Goldberg S Rutgers Law Rev; 1989; 41(2):591-623. PubMed ID: 11649263 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Fetal rights and maternal rights: is there a conflict? Rogers S Can J Women Law; 1986; 1(2):456-69. PubMed ID: 11651100 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Forced obstetrical intervention: a charter analysis. Grant I Univ Tor Law J; 1989; 39(3):217-57. PubMed ID: 11656008 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Judicial intervention in pregnancy. Martin S; Coleman M McGill Law J; 1995 Aug; 40(4):947-91. PubMed ID: 11654475 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Shared interests: promoting healthy births without sacrificing women's liberty. Johnsen D Hastings Law J; 1992 Mar; 43(3):569-614. PubMed ID: 11652106 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Of gametes and guardians: the impropriety of appointing guardians ad litem for fetuses and embryos. Goldberg S Wash Law Rev; 1991 Apr; 66(2):503-44. PubMed ID: 11656073 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Power and procreation: state interference in pregnancy. Hanigsberg JE Ottawa Law Rev; 1991; 23(1):35-70. PubMed ID: 11656189 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Forced medical treatment of pregnant women: "compelling each to live as seems good to the rest. Nelson LJ; Buggy BP; Weil CJ Hastings Law J; 1986 May; 37(5):703-63. PubMed ID: 11655855 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Pregnant women and the duty to rescue: a feminist response to the fetal rights debate. Bennett B Law Context; 1991; 9():70-91. PubMed ID: 11660071 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Medicolegal implications of constitutional status for the unborn: "ambulatory chalices" or "priorities and aspirations. Tolton C Univ Tor Fac Law Rev; 1988; 47(1):3-57. PubMed ID: 11655976 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Court-ordered cesareans: can a pregnant woman refuse? Leavine BA Houst Law Rev; 1992; 29(1):185-218. PubMed ID: 11656666 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Re Baby R: a comment on fetal apprehension. Dawson TB Can J Women Law; 1990; 4(1):265-75. PubMed ID: 11649295 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The Webster amicus curiae briefs: perspectives on the abortion controversy and the role of the Supreme Court -- amici for appellees. Annas GJ Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):169-203. PubMed ID: 11644396 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Fetal viability as a threshold to personhood. A legal analysis. Peterfy A J Leg Med; 1995 Dec; 16(4):607-36. PubMed ID: 8568420 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. From spiritual descriptions to legal prescriptions: religious imagery of women as "fetal container" in the law. Peach LJ J Law Relig; 1993-1994; 10(1):73-93. PubMed ID: 11656314 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]