489 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11660009)
1. Finding fathers: artificial insemination, lesbians, and the law.
Arnup K
Can J Women Law; 1994; 7(1):97-115. PubMed ID: 11660009
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Of father born: a lesbian feminist critique of the Ontario Law Reform Commission recommendations on artificial insemination.
Coffey MA
Can J Women Law; 1986; 1(2):424-33. PubMed ID: 11651097
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. A medical advancement in search of a legal theory--artificial insemination by donor and the law.
Baylson MM
Semin Reprod Endocrinol; 1987 Feb; 5(1):69-80. PubMed ID: 11658912
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Medico-legal aspects of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer practice.
Schenker JG; Frenkel DA
Obstet Gynecol Surv; 1987 Jul; 41(7):405-13. PubMed ID: 11658938
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. My body, my life, my baby, my rights.
Levine R
Human Rights; 1984; 12(1):27-29, 46-50. PubMed ID: 11649863
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Artificial conception: legislative approaches.
Krause HD
Fam Law Q; 1985; 19(3):185-206. PubMed ID: 11658752
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Re-expressing parenthood.
Bartlett KT
Yale Law J; 1988 Dec; 98(2):293-340. PubMed ID: 11650821
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Conceiving for cash; is it legal?: a survey of the laws applicable to surrogate motherhood.
Taylor S
N Y Law School Hum Rights Annu; 1987; 4(Part 2):413-44. PubMed ID: 11650203
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Legislating surrogacy: a partial answer to feminist criticism.
Brandel A
MD Law Rev; 1995; 54(2):488-527. PubMed ID: 11653264
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Model human reproduction technologies and surrogacy act.
Abbas J
Iowa Law Rev; 1987 May; 72(4):943-1013. PubMed ID: 11659499
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Artificial insemination and the law.
Jensen BJ
Brigh Young Univ Law Rev; 1982; 1982(4):935-90. PubMed ID: 11658495
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Fatherhood from the grave: an analysis of postmortem insemination.
Gilbert S
Hofstra Law Rev; 1993; 22(2):521-65. PubMed ID: 11660123
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. To bear or not to bear: reproductive freedom as an international human right.
Hernández BE
Brooklyn J Int Law; 1991; 17(2):309-58. PubMed ID: 11656131
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Human artificial insemination and the law in Australia.
De Stoop DF
Aust Law J; 1976 Jun; 50(6):298-308. PubMed ID: 11664730
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. New reproductive technologies and legal reform.
Roach SL
Reprod Genet Eng; 1989; 2(1):11-27. PubMed ID: 11650410
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Selling the womb: can the feminist critique of surrogacy be answered?
Lieber KB
Indiana Law J; 1992; 68(1):205-32. PubMed ID: 11659688
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The right to procreate: when rights claims have gone wrong.
Shanner L
McGill Law J; 1995 Aug; 40(4):823-74. PubMed ID: 11654471
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Reproductive technologies and surrogacy: legal issues.
Field M
Creighton Law Rev; 1992 Nov; 25(5):1589-98. PubMed ID: 11653381
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Restricting surrogacy to married couples: a constitutional problem? The married-parent requirement in the Uniform Status of Children of Assisted Conception Act.
Massie AM
Hastings Constit Law Q; 1991; 18(3):487-540. PubMed ID: 11651494
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The surrogate mother contract: in the best interests of society?
Latourette AW
Univ Richmond Law Rev; 1990; 25(1):53-92. PubMed ID: 11651389
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
