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.
254 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16127877)
21. To dispose or not to dispose: questioning the fate of preembryos after a divorce in J.B. v. M.B. Issa F Houst Law Rev; 2003; 39(5):1549-90. PubMed ID: 15212012 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. "Prenatal adoption": the Vatican's proposal to the in vitro fertilization disposition dilemma. Puskar JM N Y Law Sch J Hum Rights; 1998; 14(3):757-93. PubMed ID: 12568085 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. J.B. v. M.B. New Jersey. Supreme Court Wests Atl Report; 2001; 783():707-20. PubMed ID: 16285109 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Embryo donation: unresolved legal issues in the transfer of surplus cryopreserved embryos. Kindregan CP; McBrien M Villanova Law Rev; 2004; 49(1):169-206. PubMed ID: 16485374 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Precommitment stategies [sic] for disposition of frozen embryos. Robertson JA Emory Law J; 2001; 50(4):989-1046. PubMed ID: 12956135 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Resolving disputes over frozen embryos. Robertson JA Hastings Cent Rep; 1989; 19(6):7-12. PubMed ID: 2606667 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Disputing over embryos: of contracts and consents. Waldman EA Ariz State Law J; 2000; 32(3):897-940. PubMed ID: 12769122 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. In vitro fertilization and consent agreements: where does California stand? Ellis M Santa Clara Law Rev; 2002; 42(4):1191-225. PubMed ID: 15212074 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Seeking a better solution for the disposition of frozen embryos: is embryo adoption the answer? Redman PC; Redman LF Tulsa Law J; 2000; 35(3-4):583-98. PubMed ID: 16273678 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. A French homunculus in a Tennessee court. Annas GJ Hastings Cent Rep; 1989; 19(6):20-2. PubMed ID: 2606654 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Growing pains: disputes surrounding human reproductive interests stretch the boundaries of traditional legal concepts. Triber GA Seton Hall Legis J; 1998; 23(1):103-40. PubMed ID: 12755156 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Family law conundrums in assisted reproduction. Waldman EA Whittier Law Rev; 1999; 21(2):451-60. PubMed ID: 12199239 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Solomonic decisions in frozen preembryo disposition: unscrambling the halakhic conundrum. Warburg AY Tradition; 2002; 36(2):31-44. PubMed ID: 12848180 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Judge orders divorcing couple's frozen embryos destroyed. N Y Times Web; 1998 Sep; ():B6. PubMed ID: 11647640 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. The "embryo" wars: at the epicenter of science, law, religion, and politics. Crockin SL Fam Law Q; 2005; 39(3):599-632. PubMed ID: 16610149 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Ulysses and the fate of frozen embryos--reproduction, research, or destruction? Annas GJ N Engl J Med; 2000 Aug; 343(5):373-6. PubMed ID: 10922428 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Human reproduction: reflections on the Nachmani case. Dorner D Tex Int Law J; 2000; 35(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 12656085 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. No use of stored embryos without consent. Bull Med Ethics; 2003 Sep; (191):5-6. PubMed ID: 16208789 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Frozen embryos: what are they and how should the law treat them? Sublett MF Clevel State Law Rev; 1990; 38(4):585-616. PubMed ID: 11659459 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]