182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2764010)
1. Baby Doe, Congress and the states: challenging the federal treatment standard for impaired infants.
Newman SA
Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(1):1-60. PubMed ID: 2764010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Baby doe redux? The Department of Health and Human Services and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002: a cautionary note on normative neonatal practice.
Sayeed SA
Pediatrics; 2005 Oct; 116(4):e576-85. PubMed ID: 16199687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Ethical and legal issues in the care of the impaired newborn.
Moreno JD
Clin Perinatol; 1987 Jun; 14(2):345-60. PubMed ID: 3595056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Severely handicapped infants with life-threatening conditions: federal intrusions into the decision not to treat.
Huefner DS
Am J Law Med; 1986; 12(2):171-205. PubMed ID: 2964778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Withholding treatment from Baby Doe: from discrimination to child abuse.
Rhoden NK; Arras JD
Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc; 1985; 63(1):18-51. PubMed ID: 3158840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Child abuse and neglect prevention and treatment program--HHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking.
Fed Regist; 1984 Dec; 49(238):48160-9. PubMed ID: 10269290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A moment in human development: legal protection, ethical standards and social policy on the selective non-treatment of handicapped neonates.
Gostin L
Am J Law Med; 1985; 11(1):31-78. PubMed ID: 3832944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The Baby Doe rule: still a threat.
Moskop JC; Saldanha RL
Hastings Cent Rep; 1986 Apr; 16(2):8-14. PubMed ID: 3700081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Child abuse and neglect prevention and treatment program--HHS. Final rule.
Fed Regist; 1985 Apr; 50(72):14878-92. PubMed ID: 10270565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Infant Doe and Baby Jane Doe: medical treatment of the handicapped newborn.
Horan DJ; Balch BJ
Linacre Q; 1985 Feb; 52(1):45-76. PubMed ID: 11651855
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Infant care review committees: an effective approach to the Baby Doe dilemma?
Shapiro RS; Barthel R
Hastings Law J; 1986 May; 37(5):827-62. PubMed ID: 11655857
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Checkmating the Baby Doe regulations.
Annas GJ
Hastings Cent Rep; 1986 Aug; 16(4):29-31. PubMed ID: 3744798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 'Baby Doe' rulings-review and comment.
Britton JR
West J Med; 1984 Feb; 140(2):303-7. PubMed ID: 6730486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Baby Doe regulations: views from perinatal social workers.
York GY; Gallarno RM
J Perinatol; 1990 Sep; 10(3):312-6. PubMed ID: 2145406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The antiabortion movement and Baby Jane Doe.
Paige C; Karnofsky EB
J Health Polit Policy Law; 1986; 11(2):255-69. PubMed ID: 3745839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Ethics committees for infants doe?
Fleischman AR; Murray TH
Hastings Cent Rep; 1983 Dec; 13(6):5-9. PubMed ID: 6228539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 'Baby Doe'--a medical ethical issue.
Lang GC
West J Med; 1985 Jun; 142(6):837-41. PubMed ID: 4024642
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The law and intensive care. The role of the courts in the ethical decision-making process.
Smith DA
Crit Care Clin; 1986 Jan; 2(1):123-32. PubMed ID: 3454239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reporting the case of Baby Jane Doe.
Kerr K
Hastings Cent Rep; 1984 Aug; 14(4):7-9. PubMed ID: 6237076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comments and recommendations on the "Infant Doe" proposed regulations.
Law Med Health Care; 1983 Oct; 11(5):203-9, 213. PubMed ID: 6557312
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
