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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

335 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11658402)

  • 1. Baby Jane Doe: the ethical issues.
    Conley JJ
    America (NY); 1984 Feb; 150(5):84-9. PubMed ID: 11658402
    [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. "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]  

  • 4. Baby Jane Doe: readers' responses.
    Marzen TJ; Uddo BJ
    America (NY); 1984 Feb; 150(5):93-4. PubMed ID: 11658403
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Baby Jane Doe.
    America (NY); 1983 Nov; 149(16):302-3. PubMed ID: 11658405
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Baby Doe's legacy.
    Carroll JB; Andrusko D
    America (NY); 1985 Jun; 152(21):450-3. PubMed ID: 11658654
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. What ever happened to Baby Jane...Doe?
    Jolly CM
    West State Univ Law Rev; 1987; 14(2):543-9. PubMed ID: 11651891
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. The sanctity of life, the quality of life and the new 'Baby Doe' law.
    Johnstone BV
    Linacre Q; 1985 Aug; 52(3):258-70. PubMed ID: 11649728
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Discrimination and Baby Jane.
    Will GF
    Washington Post; 1983 Dec; ():A23. PubMed ID: 11646274
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Quality of life, sanctity of creation: palliative or apotheosis?
    Smith GP
    Neb Law Rev; 1984; 63(4):709-40. PubMed ID: 11652479
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Forgoing treatment of critically ill newborns and the legal legacy of Baby Doe.
    Nelson LJ
    Clin Ethics Rep; 1992; 6(2):1-6. PubMed ID: 11652072
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Of diagnoses and discrimination: discriminatory nontreatment of infants with HIV infection.
    Crossley MA
    Columbia Law Rev; 1993 Nov; 93(7):1581-667. PubMed ID: 11659791
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. There should never be another Baby Doe.
    Meehan M; Budde ML
    Washington Post; 1983 Apr; ():A13. PubMed ID: 11647759
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The legacy of Infant Doe.
    Cosby MG
    Bayl Law Rev; 1982; 34(4):699-715. PubMed ID: 11651747
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.