578 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11664058)
1. Test tube babies: legal issues raised by in vitro fertilization.
Flannery DM
Georgetown Law J; 1979 Aug; 67(6):1295-345. PubMed ID: 11664058
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Legislative guidelines to govern in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer.
Williams HE
Santa Clara Law Rev; 1986; 26(2):495-518. PubMed ID: 11651873
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Artificial conception: legislative approaches.
Krause HD
Fam Law Q; 1985; 19(3):185-206. PubMed ID: 11658752
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The use of in vitro fertilization: is there a right to bear or beget a child by any available medical means?
Eccles MR
Pepperdine Law Rev; 1985; 12(4):1033-57. PubMed ID: 11655769
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Alternative means of reproduction: virgin territory for legislation.
Lorio KV
LA Law Rev; 1984 Jul; 44(6):1641-76. PubMed ID: 11658743
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The legal status of the embryo.
Andrews LB
Loyola Law Rev; 1986; 32(2):357-409. PubMed ID: 11658916
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Allocation of decision-making rights to frozen embryos.
Poole EK
Am J Fam Law; 1990; 4(1):67-102. PubMed ID: 11659329
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. State prohibition of fetal experimentation and the fundamental right of privacy.
Clapp MJ
Columbia Law Rev; 1988 Jun; 88(5):1073-97. PubMed ID: 11659043
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The new pro-life legislation: patterns and recommendations.
Witherspoon JP
St Marys Law J; 1976; 7(4):637-97. PubMed ID: 11664635
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Live birth: a condition precedent to recognition of rights.
Crockett KG; Hyman M
Hofstra Law Rev; 1976; 4(3):805-36. PubMed ID: 11664599
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Predicting the future of privacy in pregnancy: how medical technology affects the legal rights of pregnant women.
Annas GJ
Nova Law Rev; 1989; 13(2):329-53. PubMed ID: 11650347
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Reproductive technology and the procreation rights of the unmarried.
Harv Law Rev; 1985 Jan; 98(3):669-85. PubMed ID: 11649801
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. New reproductive technologies and legal reform.
Roach SL
Reprod Genet Eng; 1989; 2(1):11-27. PubMed ID: 11650410
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Legal issues seen in Vatican call for laws to bar birth technology.
Chambers M
N Y Times Web; 1987 Mar; ():A1, B5. PubMed ID: 11647375
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Fetal research: a view from right to life to wrongful birth.
Munson JW
Chic Kent Law Rev; 1975; 52(1):133-56. PubMed ID: 11664521
[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. Alternative birth technologies: legal challenges.
Capron AM
Univ Calif Davis Law Rev; 1987; 20(4):679-704. PubMed ID: 11659041
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
