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 *

225 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17872560)

  • 41. Killing with kindness: why the FDA need not certify drugs used for execution safe and effective.
    Annas GJ
    Am J Public Health; 1985 Sep; 75(9):1096-9. PubMed ID: 4025665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Shifting Diagnostic Systems for Defining Intellectual Disability in Death Penalty Cases: Hall vs. Florida.
    Mukherjee M; Westphal A
    J Autism Dev Disord; 2015 Jul; 45(7):2277-8. PubMed ID: 25663625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Capital punishment and offenders with mental retardation: response to the Penry brief.
    Calnen T; Blackman LS
    Am J Ment Retard; 1992 May; 96(6):557-64; discussion 565-75. PubMed ID: 1344935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Pro se competence in the aftermath of Indiana v. Edwards.
    Morris DR; Frierson RL
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2008; 36(4):551-7. PubMed ID: 19092075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Juvenile justice. A role for health professionals.
    Brookman M
    J Ambul Care Manage; 2003; 26(1):91-2. PubMed ID: 12545519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Behavioral science and the juvenile death penalty.
    Leong GB; Eth S
    Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1989; 17(3):301-9. PubMed ID: 2676026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Mental retardation and the death penalty in the USA: the clinical and legal legacy.
    French LA
    Crim Behav Ment Health; 2005; 15(2):82-6. PubMed ID: 16470501
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Validity issues in Atkins death cases.
    Chafetz MD; Biondolillo A
    Clin Neuropsychol; 2012; 26(8):1358-76. PubMed ID: 23035759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Mental retardation and the death penalty: a guide to State Legislative issues.
    Ellis JW
    Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep; 2003; 27(1):11-24. PubMed ID: 14651033
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Psychiatrists' role in the death penalty.
    Appelbaum PS
    Hosp Community Psychiatry; 1981 Nov; 32(11):761-2. PubMed ID: 7286928
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Who--and how--to kill are focus of US death penalty cases. Questions about prisoners' mental competence and use of pancuronium bromide ignite recent controversy.
    Oransky I
    Lancet; 2003 Oct; 362(9392):1287. PubMed ID: 14577434
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Eliminating the Competency Presumption in Juvenile Delinquency Cases.
    Katner DR
    Cornell J Law Public Policy; 2015; 24(3):403-50. PubMed ID: 26809160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The ethical "elephant" in the death penalty "room".
    Keane M
    Am J Bioeth; 2008 Oct; 8(10):45-50. PubMed ID: 19003709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Abortion: rights or technicalities? A comparison of Roe v. Wade with the abortion decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court.
    Brown HO
    Hum Life Rev; 1975; 1(3):60-74. PubMed ID: 11662181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. The death penalty for juvenile offenders.
    Regan J; Alderson A
    Tenn Med; 2003 Oct; 96(10):473-4. PubMed ID: 14574724
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. The ethics of the Texas death penalty and its impact on a prolonged appeals process.
    Pearlman T
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1998; 26(4):655-60. PubMed ID: 9894222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. After Cruzan. The U. S. Supreme Court's decision settles the case but raises new questions.
    Johnson SH
    Health Prog; 1990 Oct; 71(8):38-41, 57. PubMed ID: 10107437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Penry revisited: is execution of a person who has mental retardation cruel and unusual?
    Herbert PB; Young KA
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2002; 30(2):282-6. PubMed ID: 12108566
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Law & psychiatry: Treatment of incompetent, dangerous criminal defendants: parsing the law.
    Appelbaum PS
    Psychiatr Serv; 2012 Jul; 63(7):630-2. PubMed ID: 22752031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Indiana v. Davis: revisiting due process rights of permanently incompetent defendants.
    Morris DR; Parker GF
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2009; 37(3):380-5. PubMed ID: 19767504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.