These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12041261)

  • 1. C.O. v. W.S.
    Ohio. Court of Common Pleas, Cuyahoga County, Juvenile Division
    North East Rep Second Ser; 1994 Mar; 639():523-5. PubMed ID: 12041261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. In re Adoption of Matthew B.-M.
    California. Court of Appeal, First District, Division 3
    Wests Calif Report; 1991 Jul; 284():18-38. PubMed ID: 11648597
    [TBL] [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. New wine in old skins: using paternity-suit settlements to facilitate surrogate motherhood.
    Clark NL
    J Fam Law; 1987 Apr; 25(3):483-527. PubMed ID: 11658883
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. In re Baby M.
    New Jersey. Supreme Court
    Atl Report; 1988 Feb; 537():1227-73. PubMed ID: 11648559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Austria: a legal ban on surrogate mothers and fathers?
    Bernat E; Straka U
    J Fam Law; 1992-1993 Spring; 31(2):267-82. PubMed ID: 11660068
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Donor insemination (transsexual): parentage -- X, Y and Z v. United Kingdom.
    Grubb A
    Med Law Rev; 1998; 6(3):387-91. PubMed ID: 11658023
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Anna J. v. Mark C.
    California. Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3
    Wests Calif Report; 1991 Oct; 286():369-82. PubMed ID: 11648598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Surrogate motherhood and the baby-selling laws.
    Katz A
    Columbia J Law Soc Probl; 1986; 20(1):1-53. PubMed ID: 11658800
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sexuality, privacy and the new biology.
    Smith GP; Iraola R
    Marquette Law Rev; 1984; 67(2):263-91. PubMed ID: 11658703
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Legal aspects of artificial insemination.
    Shaman JM
    J Fam Law; 1979; 18(2):331-51. PubMed ID: 11665122
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Frustrated intentions and binding biology: seeking AID (Artificial Insemination by Donor) in the law.
    Schiff AR
    Duke Law J; 1994 Dec; 44(3):524-70. PubMed ID: 11660686
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The role of rights and utility in instituting a child's right to know her genetic history.
    Wallbank J
    Soc Leg Stud; 2004 Jun; 13(2):245-64. PubMed ID: 16270466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. R.R. v. M.H.
    Massachusetts. Supreme Judicial Court, Worcester
    North East Rep Second Ser; 1998 Jan; 689():790-7. PubMed ID: 12041242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. C.M. v. C.C. 19 Jul 1977.
    New Jersey. Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, Cumberland County
    Atl Report; 1977; 377():821-5. PubMed ID: 11646071
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. What does it mean to be a "parent"? The claims of biology as the basis for parental rights.
    Hill JL
    N Y Univ Law Rev; 1991 May; 66(2):353-420. PubMed ID: 11659546
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Privacy, surrogacy, and the Baby M case.
    Allen AL
    Georgetown Law J; 1988 Jun; 76(5):1759-92. PubMed ID: 11649250
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Syrkowski v. Appleyard.
    Michigan. Supreme Court
    Wests North West Rep; 1985 Jan; 362():211-4. PubMed ID: 12041132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Huddleston v. Infertility Center of America.
    Pennsylvania. Superior Court
    Atl Report; 1997 Aug; 700():453-62. PubMed ID: 11648634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. McDonald v. McDonald.
    New York. Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department
    N Y Suppl Second Ser; 1994 Feb; 608():477-81. PubMed ID: 12041118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.