281 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11660128)
1. From cannibalism to caesareans: two conceptions of fundamental rights.
Hasnas J
Northwest Univ Law Rev; 1995; 89(3):900-41. PubMed ID: 11660128
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Toward a Thomistic perspective on abortion and the law in contemporary America.
Kaveny MC
Thomist; 1991 Jul; 55(3):343-96. PubMed ID: 11656147
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. In re A.C.: a court-ordered cesarean becomes precedent for nonconsensual organ harvesting.
Sturgess RH
Nova Law Rev; 1989; 13(2):649-69. PubMed ID: 11650356
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Mama vs. fetus.
Hornick HL
Med Trial Tech Q; 1993; 39(4):536-69. PubMed ID: 11659785
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Hospital sets policy on pregnant patients' rights.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1990 Nov; ():B14. PubMed ID: 11646791
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Unenumerated rights: whether and how Roe should be overruled.
Dworkin R
Univ Chic Law Rev; 1992; 59(1):381-432. PubMed ID: 11656301
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Notes from the field: a reply to Professor Colker.
Burns SE
Harv Womens Law J; 1990; 13():189-206. PubMed ID: 11656054
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Furthering the inquiry: race, class, and culture in the forced medical treatment of pregnant women.
Ikemoto LC
Tenn Law Rev; 1992; 59(3):487-517. PubMed ID: 11652636
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Resisting the temptation to turn medical recommendations into judicial orders: a reconsideration of court-ordered surgery for pregnant women.
Scott C
Ga State Univ Law Rev; 1994 May; 10(4):615-89. PubMed ID: 11656420
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Abortion, ethics, and the common good: Who are we? What do we want? How do we get there?
Araujo RJ
Marquette Law Rev; 1993; 76():701-54. PubMed ID: 11659963
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Court-ordered cesareans: can a pregnant woman refuse?
Leavine BA
Houst Law Rev; 1992; 29(1):185-218. PubMed ID: 11656666
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Brief asks reversal of assisted-suicide ruling.
; ; ;
Origins; 1994 Sep; 24(12):214-22. PubMed ID: 11652894
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Abortion rights: taking responsibilities more seriously than Dworkin.
Trakman LE; Gatien S
SMU Law Rev; 1995; 48(3):585-608. PubMed ID: 11660800
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The constitutional morality of abortion.
Brownstein A; Dau P
Boston Coll Law Rev; 1992 Jul; 33(4):689-761. PubMed ID: 11656217
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. The role of courts in the debate on assisted suicide: a communitarian approach.
Beschle DL
Notre Dame J Law Ethics Public Policy; 1995; 9(2):367-405. PubMed ID: 11653000
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Forced cesarean sections: do the ends justify the means?
Drigotas EE
North Carol Law Rev; 1991 Nov; 70(1):297-321. PubMed ID: 11651652
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The constitutionality of court-ordered cesarean surgery: a threshold question.
Levine EM
Albany Law J Sci Technol; 1994; 4(2):229-309. PubMed ID: 12091921
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
