303 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3391765)
1. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M.
Annas GJ
Hastings Cent Rep; 1988; 18(2):21-4. PubMed ID: 3391765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The role of contract principles in determining the validity of surrogacy contracts.
Carbone JR
Santa Clara Law Rev; 1988; 28(3):581-610. PubMed ID: 16047440
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Baby M: babies (and justice) for sale.
Annas GJ
Hastings Cent Rep; 1987 Jun; 17(3):13-5. PubMed ID: 3610624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Matter of Baby M., 3 February 1988.
United States. New Jersey. Supreme Court
Annu Rev Popul Law; 1988; 15():61. PubMed ID: 12289633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Surrogate mothers: whose baby is it?
Cohen B
Am J Law Med; 1984; 10(3):243-85. PubMed ID: 6534187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Surrogacy, adoption, and custody.
Brahams D
Lancet; 1987 Apr; 1(8536):817. PubMed ID: 2882230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Surrogate contracts. Contractual and constitutional conundrums in the Baby "M" case.
Perry C
J Leg Med; 1988 Mar; 9(1):105-22. PubMed ID: 3260262
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Evolving issues in surrogate motherhood.
Erlen JA; Holzman IR
Health Care Women Int; 1990; 11(3):319-29. PubMed ID: 2391288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Surrogacy: is it harder to relinquish genes?
Trowse P
J Law Med; 2011 Mar; 18(3):614-33. PubMed ID: 21528745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Surrogacy: is there a case for legal prohibition?
Goold I
J Law Med; 2004 Nov; 12(2):205-16. PubMed ID: 15575322
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The aftermath of Baby M: proposed state laws on surrogate motherhood.
Andrews LB
Hastings Cent Rep; 1987; 17(5):31-40. PubMed ID: 3692805
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. (Baby) M is for the many things: why I start with Baby M.
Sanger C
St Louis Univ Law J; 2000; 44(4):1443-64. PubMed ID: 12449927
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The baby broker boom.
Annas GJ
Hastings Cent Rep; 1986 Jun; 16(3):30-1. PubMed ID: 3721847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Whose child? In Re Baby M and the biological preference principle.
Houlgate LD
Logos (Santa Clara); 1988; 9():161-77. PubMed ID: 12708426
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Revisiting child-based objections to commercial surrogacy.
Hanna JK
Bioethics; 2010 Sep; 24(7):341-7. PubMed ID: 20690918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Israeli surrogacy law in practice.
Honig D; Nave O; Adam R
Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sci; 2000; 37(2):115-23. PubMed ID: 10994295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [To FIV or not to FIV: Will gestational surrogacy be an indication for assisted reproductive techniques?].
Delaisi de Parseval G
Gynecol Obstet Fertil; 2006 Sep; 34(9):720-6. PubMed ID: 16959522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Biological parents regaining their rights: a psycholegal analysis of a new era in custody disputes.
Kermani EJ; Weiss BA
Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1995; 23(2):261-7. PubMed ID: 8605410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Issues of child custody and our moral values in the era of new medical technology.
Kermani EJ
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry; 1992 May; 31(3):533-8. PubMed ID: 1592788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
