252 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11656024)
1. 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]
2. 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]
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. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Compulsory treatment of pregnant women.
Nelson LJ
Clin Ethics Rep; 1987 May; 1(5):1-8. PubMed ID: 11659055
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Lack of consent although informed: fetal neglect.
Reece SA; Reece EA
Med Trial Tech Q; 1985; 32(2):130-44. PubMed ID: 11649199
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Prenatal invasions and interventions: what's wrong with fetal rights?
Gallagher J
Harv Womens Law J; 1987; 10():9-58. PubMed ID: 11649954
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Unborn child abuse: contemplating legal solution.
Dorczak A
Can J Fam Law; 1991; 9(2):133-56. PubMed ID: 11656494
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Abortion and democracy for women: a critique of Tremblay v. Daigle.
Greschner D
McGill Law J; 1990 Sep; 35(3):633-69. PubMed ID: 11656074
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]