381 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16184655)
41. Can technology solve the abortion dilemma?
Maguire MR
Christ Century; 1976 Oct; 93(34):918-9. PubMed ID: 11663690
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
42. Abortion: state action.
Womens Rights Law Report; 1977; 3(3-4):162-9. PubMed ID: 11663757
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. Court-ordered obstetrical intervention and the rights of a pregnant woman.
Thampapillai D
J Law Med; 2005 May; 12(4):455-61. PubMed ID: 15957588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. New York v. Sullivan: shhh ... don't say the "a" word! Another outcome-oriented abortion decision.
Kendall CC
John Marshall Law Rev; 1990; 23(4):753-70. PubMed ID: 16622962
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. Terminating artificial nutrition and hydration in persistent vegetative state patients: current and proposed state laws.
Machado C
Neurology; 2007 Jan; 68(4):312; author reply 312-3. PubMed ID: 17242347
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. A realistic approach to maternal-fetal conflict.
Hornstra D
Hastings Cent Rep; 1998; 28(5):7-12. PubMed ID: 11656772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Enforcement problems arising from conflicting views of living wills in the legal, medical and patient communities.
Webster P
Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 2001; 62(4):793-813. PubMed ID: 12774779
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
48. Court-ordered care--a complication of pregnancy to avoid.
Cantor JD
N Engl J Med; 2012 Jun; 366(24):2237-40. PubMed ID: 22693994
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
49. U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear fetal protection employment policy.
Michel SE
Occup Health Saf; 1990 Jul; 59(7):40-1. PubMed ID: 2388739
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. Financial penalties for failing to honor patient wishes to refuse treatment.
Gasner MR
St Louis Univ Public Law Rev; 1992; 11():499-520. PubMed ID: 16047426
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. Reconciling fetal/maternal conflicts.
Kim RH
Ida Law Rev; 1990-1991; 27(2):223-48. PubMed ID: 16032814
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. The social meaning of the Norplant condition: constitutional considerations of race, class, and gender.
Albiston C
Berkeley Womens Law J; 1994; 9():9-57. PubMed ID: 16767841
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. Bioethical consideration of maternal-fetal issues.
Post LF
Fordham Urban Law J; 1997; 24(4):757-75. PubMed ID: 12455510
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. Cesareans and Samaritans.
Rhoden NK
Law Med Health Care; 1987; 15(3):118-25. PubMed ID: 3695574
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
55. A Violent Birth: Reframing Coerced Procedures During Childbirth as Obstetric Violence.
Borges MT
Duke Law J; 2018 Jan; 67(4):827-62. PubMed ID: 29469554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. A feminist utilitarian perspective on euthanasia: from Nancy Crick to Terri Schiavo.
Tulloch G
Nurs Inq; 2005 Jun; 12(2):155-60. PubMed ID: 15892731
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. Fetal interests vs. maternal rights: is the state going too far?
Trindel RM
Akron Law Rev; 1991; 24(3-4):743-62. PubMed ID: 16273672
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
58. The right of privacy and restraints on abortion under the "undue burden" test: a jurisprudential comparison of Planned Parenthood v. Casey with European practice and Italian law.
Ross CS
Indiana Int Comp Law Rev; 1993; 3():199-231. PubMed ID: 12091926
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
59. State v. Oakley: infringing on women's reproductive rights.
Schehr AR
Wis Womens Law J; 2003; 18(2):281-97. PubMed ID: 15568247
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
60. Rights of and duties to non-consenting patients--informed refusal in the developing world.
van Bogaert LJ
Dev World Bioeth; 2006 Mar; 6(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 16436170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
