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.
227 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16130262)
21. A ray of light about frozen embryos. Clayton EW Kennedy Inst Ethics J; 1992 Dec; 2(4):347-59. PubMed ID: 11645754 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. From a to z: analysis of Massachusetts' approach to the enforceability of cryopreserved pre-embryo dispositional agreements. Kaplan S Boston Univ Law Rev; 2001 Dec; 81(5):1093-118. PubMed ID: 12715818 [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. Davis v. Davis: what about future disputes? Feliciano T Conn Law Rev; 1993; 26(1):305-53. PubMed ID: 11660034 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Reproductive capacity: what does the embryo get? Stephens KU South Univ Law Rev; 1997; 24(2):263-91. PubMed ID: 16528857 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Judge orders divorcing couple's frozen embryos destroyed. N Y Times Web; 1998 Sep; ():B6. PubMed ID: 11647640 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. Frozen embryos: a need for thawing in the legislative process. Davidoff BE SMU Law Rev; 1993; 47(1):131-64. PubMed ID: 11652686 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Judge rules woman who provides eggs has right to decide embryos' fate. N Y Times Web; 1995 Jan; ():B5. PubMed ID: 11647991 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Sperm, egg, and a petri dish. Unveiling the underlying property issues surrounding cryopreserved embryos. Langley LS; Blackston JW J Leg Med; 2006 Jun; 27(2):167-206. PubMed ID: 16728352 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. The Solomon decision: a study of Davis v. Davis. Eget MM Mercer Law Rev; 1991; 42(3):1113-28. PubMed ID: 11651437 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. In-vitro fertilization, frozen embryos, and the right to privacy--are mandatory donation laws constitutional? Schaefer K Pac Law J; 1990 Oct; 22(1):87-121. PubMed ID: 16047419 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Sign on the dotted line: enforceability of signed agreements, upon divorce of the married couple, concerning the disposition of their frozen preembryos. Rosado M New Engl Law Rev; 2002; 36(4):1041-75. PubMed ID: 15162814 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Navigating the slippery slope of frozen embryo disputes: the case for a contractual approach. Fleming NA Temple Law Rev; 2002; 75(2):345-74. PubMed ID: 15156893 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Court says woman can bar embryos' use. N Y Times Web; 2001 Aug; ():B6. PubMed ID: 12155241 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. The human preembryo, the progenitors, and the state: toward a dynamic theory of status, rights, and research policy. Martin PA; Lagod ML High Technol Law J; 1990; 5(2):257-310. PubMed ID: 11659412 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. His, hers, or theirs--custody, control, and contracts: allocating decisional authority over frozen embryos. Walter P Seton Hall Law Rev; 1999; 29(3):937-69. PubMed ID: 10569840 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. The present standing of the human embryo in U.S. law. Avila D Natl Cathol Bioeth Q; 2001; 1(2):203-26. PubMed ID: 12854540 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Halakhic approaches to the resolution of disputes concerning the disposition of preembryos. Breitowitz YA Tradition; 1996; 31(1):64-91. PubMed ID: 11654662 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]