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 *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1357414)

  • 1. Compulsory intervention during pregnancy.
    Brahams D
    Lancet; 1992 Oct; 340(8826):1029-30. PubMed ID: 1357414
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Enforced caesarean section: a US appeal.
    Brahams D
    Lancet; 1990 May; 335(8700):1270. PubMed ID: 1971334
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Forcible caesarean: a new direction in British maternity care? Thoughts on the case of Mrs S.
    Crafter H
    Nurs Ethics; 1994 Mar; 1(1):53-5. PubMed ID: 7828056
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Court-ordered cesarean sections. A judicial standard for resolving the conflict between fetal interests and maternal rights.
    Noble-Allgire AM
    J Leg Med; 1989 Mar; 10(1):211-49. PubMed ID: 2651546
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The midwife and moral dilemma.
    Barki PA
    Midwifery Today Childbirth Educ; 1997; (41):57-8. PubMed ID: 9136427
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Caesarean without maternal consent.
    Bewley S
    Bull Med Ethics; 1992 Dec; No. 84():2. PubMed ID: 11651572
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Compulsory caesareans: the last world?
    Dimond B
    Pract Midwife; 1998 Jun; 1(6):10-2. PubMed ID: 9735815
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Sheila Kitzinger's letter from Europe: court-ordered cesareans in the United Kingdom.
    Kitzinger S
    Birth; 1998 Sep; 25(3):202-3. PubMed ID: 9767224
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Colleges say no to forced caesarean sections.
    Dyer C
    BMJ; 1994 Jan; 308(6923):224. PubMed ID: 11644510
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Court orders caesarean section.
    Bull Med Ethics; 1992 Oct; No. 82():3-4. PubMed ID: 11651514
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Medical treatment--refusal of medical treatment--adult--refusal on religions grounds: Re S (refusal of medical treatment).
    Lloyd H; Munby J; Brown SP;
    New Law J; 1992 Oct; 142(6573):1450-1. PubMed ID: 16184670
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Court-authorised caesareans: new guidance.
    Health Care Anal; 1997 Sep; 5(3):240-3. PubMed ID: 10184767
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. In re A.C. reversed: judicial recognition of the rights of pregnant women.
    Obade CC
    J Clin Ethics; 1990; 1(3):251. PubMed ID: 2132021
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Consent: adult, refusal of consent, capacity: Re M.B. (Medical Treatment).
    Kennedy I
    Med Law Rev; 1997; 5(3):317-25. PubMed ID: 11657492
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Medical treatment: the mother's rights.
    Bridgeman J
    Family Law; 1993 Sep; 23():534-5. PubMed ID: 11657220
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Hard cases make bad law?
    Brazier M
    J Med Ethics; 1997 Dec; 23(6):341-3. PubMed ID: 9451601
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. After Re S.
    Thomson M
    Med Law Rev; 1994; 2(2):127-48. PubMed ID: 12159826
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Court-ordered cesareans--choice or control?
    Rowan C
    Nurs Ethics; 1998 Nov; 5(6):542-4. PubMed ID: 9856072
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Re S (Adult: Refusal of Medical Treatment).
    Great Britain. England. High Court of Justice, Family Division
    All Engl Law Rep; 1992 Oct; [1992]4():671-2. PubMed ID: 11648229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Pregnant women and consent to medical treatment.
    Ginn DE
    Health Law Can; 1994; 15(2):41-8. PubMed ID: 10153629
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.