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.
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. The Baby Doe regulations: another view of change. Weil WB Hastings Cent Rep; 1986 Apr; 16(2):12-3. PubMed ID: 3700073 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Treatment of seriously ill and handicapped newborns. Fost N Crit Care Clin; 1986 Jan; 2(1):145-59. PubMed ID: 11644122 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Do the "Baby Doe" rules ignore suffering? Kopelman LM Second Opin; 1993 Apr; 18(4):101-13. PubMed ID: 10125415 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Balancing wishes with wisdom: sustaining infant life. Wakefield-Fisher M Nurs Health Care; 1987 Nov; 8(9):517-20. PubMed ID: 11644099 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Playing God in the NICU. Ethical guidelines focus on what seems best for the handicapped infant--Saint Vincent Health Center, Erie, PA. Drane JF Health Prog; 1989 Mar; 70(2):26-31. PubMed ID: 10318203 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Neonatologists and bioethics after Baby Doe. Carter BS J Perinatol; 1993; 13(2):144-50. PubMed ID: 8515309 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Ethical dilemmas in the treatment of critically ill newborns. Brooks BF J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1985; 1(1):133-41. PubMed ID: 10280374 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Baby Doe redux: doctors as child abusers. Annas GJ Hastings Cent Rep; 1983 Oct; 13(5):26-7. PubMed ID: 6643033 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The legacy of Baby Doe: five perspectives. Ciulla JB Psychol Today; 1987 Jan; 21(1):70-71, 74-75. PubMed ID: 11658812 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Another court challenge predicted following revised 'Baby Doe' rule. Med World News; 1983 Jul; 24(14):54, 59. PubMed ID: 11645668 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Who is responsible for Baby Doe? Andrusko D; Fost N; Horowitz RM; Johnson M; Marchand P; Slack IJ Public Welf; 1984; 42(3):4-9. PubMed ID: 10317487 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]