444 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11658577)
21. A matter of life and death: Reform Judaism and the defective child.
Block RA
J Reform Jud; 1984; 41(4):14-30. PubMed ID: 11651763
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. The ideal of community in the work of the President's Commission.
Burt RA
Cardozo Law Rev; 1984; 6(2):267-86. PubMed ID: 11651800
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. Nat Hentoff on the babies Doe.
McFadden JP; Hentoff N
Hum Life Rev; 1984; 10(2):73-104. PubMed ID: 11651744
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Termination of care of newborn infants.
Freeman JM; McDonnell K
Semin Neurol; 1984 Mar; 4(1):30-5. PubMed ID: 11649665
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Passive euthanasia of defective newborn infants: legal considerations.
Robertson JA; Fost N
J Pediatr Surg; 1976 May; 88(5):883-9. PubMed ID: 11662998
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Rationing expensive lifesaving medical treatments.
Mehlman MJ
Wis L Rev; 1985; 1985(2):239-303. PubMed ID: 11658831
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Withholding or withdrawing life support for newborns: today's ethical problem in neonatology.
Nicolopoulos DA
Prenat Neonatal Med; 1998 Jun; 3(3):358-62. PubMed ID: 11660657
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. A new predicament for physicians: the concept of medical futility, the physician's obligation to render inappropriate treatment, and the interplay of the medical standard of care.
Levine EM
J Law Health; 1994-1995; 9(1):69-108. PubMed ID: 11654456
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Medical authority and infanticide.
Malone PA
J Law Health; 1985-1986; 1(1):77-111. PubMed ID: 11658876
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Reducing suffering and ensuring beneficial outcomes for neonates: an ethical perspective.
Brodeur D
Bioethics Forum; 1995; 11(1):17-22. PubMed ID: 11653274
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Legal and ethical issues concerning treatment of seriously ill newborns.
Johnson V
Loyola Law Rev; 1985; 30(4):925-51. PubMed ID: 11651874
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. 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]
34. "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]
35. The death of Infant Doe.
Verhey A
Reform J; 1982 Jun; 32(6):10-5. PubMed ID: 11651829
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. 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]
37. Is one allowed to stop artificial organs, allowing patients to die? Opposing physicians' and philosophers' views.
Kjellstrand CM; Dolan JM; Rachels J; Epstein FH
Trans Am Soc Artif Intern Organs; 1986; 32(2):671-87. PubMed ID: 11659046
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Spina bifida: the surgeon's responsibility.
Eckstein H
Doc Med Ethics; 1974 Apr 1974, 4 p 3; No():. PubMed ID: 11662938
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. 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]
40. 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]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
