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.
318 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11655855)
1. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
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. The right to begin life with sound body and mind: fetal patients and conflicts with their mothers. Dougherty CJ Univ Detroit Law Rev; 1985; 63(1-2):89-117. PubMed ID: 11659281 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Rethinking (m)otherhood: feminist theory and state regulation of pregnancy. Harv Law Rev; 1990 Apr; 103(6):1325-43. PubMed ID: 11656270 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The judge in the delivery room: the emergence of court-ordered cesareans. Rhoden NK Calif Law Rev; 1986 Dec; 74(6):1951-2030. PubMed ID: 11658950 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
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. 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]
12. Court-ordered cesareans: a growing concern for indigent women. Daniels JA Clgh Rev; 1988 Feb; 21(9):1064-71. PubMed ID: 11649972 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. A new crime, fetal neglect: state intervention to protect the unborn--protection at what cost? Manson R; Marolt J Calif West Law Rev; 1987-1988; 24(1):161-82. PubMed ID: 11650070 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Apprehending the fetus en ventre sa mere: a study in judicial sleight of hand. Tateishi SA Sask Law Rev; 1989; 53(1):113-41. PubMed ID: 11656024 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. The maternal abdominal wall: a fortress against fetal health care? Phelan JP South Calif Law Rev; 1991 Nov; 65(1):461-90. PubMed ID: 11645842 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Defining the boundaries of personal privacy: is there a paternal interest in compelling therapeutic fetal surgery? Blickenstaff DC Northwest Univ Law Rev; 1994; 88(3):1157-99. PubMed ID: 11656414 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Mama vs. fetus. Hornick HL Med Trial Tech Q; 1993; 39(4):536-69. PubMed ID: 11659785 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Two patients or one? Problems of consent in obstetrics. Miller L Med Law Int; 1993; 1(1):97-112. PubMed ID: 11659741 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]