190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11664886)
1. The wicked witch is almost dead: Buck v. Bell and the sterilization of handicapped persons.
Burgdorf RL; Burgdorf MP
Temple Law Q; 1977; 50(4):995-1034. PubMed ID: 11664886
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. From involuntary sterilization to genetic enhancement: the unsettled legacy of Buck v. Bell.
Berry RM
Notre Dame J Law Ethics Public Policy; 1999; 12(2):401-48. PubMed ID: 12755089
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Involuntary sterilization of the mentally retarded: blessing or burden?
Coleman SS
S D Law Rev; 1980; 25(1):55-68. PubMed ID: 11665097
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Sterilization of the mentally disabled in Pennsylvania: three generations without legislative guidance are enough.
Estacio RA
Dickinson Law Rev; 1988; 92(2):409-36. PubMed ID: 11659036
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Sterilization of the retarded: a problem or a solution?
Murdock CW
Calif Law Rev; 1974 May; 62(3):917-35. PubMed ID: 11663463
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The conflict between "disabling" and "enabling" paradigms in law: sterilization, the developmentally disabled, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Dugan JC
Cornell Law Rev; 1993 Mar; 78(3):507-42. PubMed ID: 11659683
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The permissibility of involuntary sterilization under the parens patriae and police power authority of the state: In re Sterilization of Moore.
Gauvey SK; Shuger NB
Univ Md Law Forum; 1976; 6(3):109-28. PubMed ID: 11664760
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Modern judicial treatment of procreative rights of developmentally disabled persons: equal rights to procreation and sterilization.
Jaegers EM
J Fam Law; 1992-1993 Fall; 31(4):947-79. PubMed ID: 11660196
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Substantive due process--compulsory sterilization of the mentally deficient.
Chernus RO
NY Law Sch Law Rev; 1977; 23(1):151-8. PubMed ID: 11664850
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The sterilization of Carrie Buck.
Gaylord CL
Case Comment; 1978; 83(5):18-20+. PubMed ID: 11662508
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Constitutional law--legislative naiveté in involuntary sterilization laws.
Shaw RH
Wake Forest Law Rev; 1976; 12(4):1064-81. PubMed ID: 11664745
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. When terminating parental rights is not enough: a new look at compulsory sterilization.
Blum ET
Georgia Law Rev; 1994; 28(4):977-1017. PubMed ID: 11653343
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Developments--the family. V. Procreative rights.
Harv Law Rev; 1980 Apr; 93(6):1296-308. PubMed ID: 11665179
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Validity of statutes authorizing asexualization or sterilization of criminals or mental defectives.
Ghent JF
Am Law Rep ALR 3rd Cases Annot; 1973; 53():960-96. PubMed ID: 12091928
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Sexual sterilization--constitutional validity of involuntary sterilization and consent determinative of voluntariness.
Baker JD
Miss Law Rev; 1975; 40(3):509-26. PubMed ID: 11664500
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Compulsory sterilization: weeding Mendel's garden.
Richardson JM
Drake Law Rev; 1973 Jan; 22(2):355-64. PubMed ID: 11662932
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Three generations, no imbeciles: new light on Buck v. Bell.
Lombardo PA
N Y Univ Law Rev; 1985 Apr; 60(1):30-62. PubMed ID: 11658945
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. In re Moore: the sound and the fury and the scalpel.
Henry NB
North Carol Centr Law J; 1977; 8(2):307-15. PubMed ID: 11664899
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Involuntary sterilization: an unconstitutional menace to minorities and the poor.
Spriggs EJ
Rev Law Soc Change; 1974; 4(2):127-51. PubMed ID: 11664642
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Voluntary sterilization for persons with mental disabilities: the need for legislation.
Burnett BA
Syracuse Law Rev; 1981; 32(4):913-55. PubMed ID: 11658516
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
