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 *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20465080)

  • 1. Where is the voice of the man the child will become?
    Geisheker JV
    J Clin Ethics; 2010; 21(1):86-8. PubMed ID: 20465080
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Where is the child? Circumcision and custody in Boldt v. Boldt.
    Dolgin JL
    J Clin Ethics; 2009; 20(3):244-50. PubMed ID: 19845197
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Boldt v. Boldt.
    Davis DS
    J Clin Ethics; 2009; 20(3):241-3. PubMed ID: 19845196
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Boldt v. Boldt: A pediatric ethics perspective.
    Diekema DS
    J Clin Ethics; 2009; 20(3):251-7. PubMed ID: 19845198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The use of pediatric advance directives: a tool for palliative care physicians.
    Zinner SE
    Am J Hosp Palliat Care; 2008 Dec-2009 Jan; 25(6):427-30. PubMed ID: 18812617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Adolescent decisionmaking, part I: Introduction.
    Hester DM
    Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 2009; 18(3):300-2. PubMed ID: 19460232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Circumcision and the best interests of the child.
    Forbes D
    J Paediatr Child Health; 2015 Mar; 51(3):263-5. PubMed ID: 25758306
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Infant male circumcision and the autonomy of the child: two ethical questions.
    McMath A
    J Med Ethics; 2015 Aug; 41(8):687-90. PubMed ID: 25710966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The child's interests and the case for the permissibility of male infant circumcision.
    Mazor J
    J Med Ethics; 2013 Jul; 39(7):421-8. PubMed ID: 23698892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Going beyond parents and institutional review boards in protecting children involved in nontherapeutic research.
    Rubinstein E
    Gold Gate Univ Law Rev; 2003; 33(2):251-94. PubMed ID: 15164740
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Using bioethics discourse to determine when parents should make health care decisions for their children: is deference justified?
    Rosato JL
    Temple Law Rev; 2000; 73(1):1-68. PubMed ID: 12449931
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Against the tide: arguments against respecting a minor's refusal of efficacious life-saving treatment.
    Ross LF
    Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 2009; 18(3):302-15; discussion 315-22. PubMed ID: 19460233
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Nontherapeutic circumcision is ethically bankrupt.
    Hampton WF
    Am J Bioeth; 2003; 3(2):W8. PubMed ID: 12859799
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Children and adolescents' capacity to provide informed consent for participation in research.
    Kuther TL; Posada M
    Adv Psychol Res; 2004; 32():163-73. PubMed ID: 16986221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The competence of children: no longer all or none.
    Gaylin W
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1982 Apr; 12(2):33-8. PubMed ID: 7096064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Male circumcision, religious preferences, and the question of harm.
    Sheldon M
    Am J Bioeth; 2003; 3(2):61-2. PubMed ID: 12859823
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Standards for family decisions: replacing best interests with harm prevention.
    Dresser R
    Am J Bioeth; 2003; 3(2):54-5. PubMed ID: 12859819
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Parental consent: its justification and limitations.
    Langham P
    Clin Res; 1979 Dec; 27(5):349-58. PubMed ID: 10244854
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Ancient rites and new laws: how should we regulate religious circumcision of minors?
    Davis DS
    J Med Ethics; 2013 Jul; 39(7):456-8. PubMed ID: 23698891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Parental refusals of medical treatment: the harm principle as threshold for state intervention.
    Diekema DS
    Theor Med Bioeth; 2004; 25(4):243-64. PubMed ID: 15637945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.