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.
273 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6917002)
1. Legal problems of medical practice; withholding treatment from defective newborns. Taub S Law Med Health Care; 1982 Feb; 10(1):4-10. PubMed ID: 6917002 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Dilemma in Danville. Robertson JA Hastings Cent Rep; 1981 Oct; 11(5):5-8. PubMed ID: 7309501 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Birth-defective infants: a standard for nontreatment decisions. MacMillan ES Stanford Law Rev; 1978 Feb; 30(3):599-633. PubMed ID: 10306127 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. '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]
5. Letting defective babies die: who decides? Ellis TS Am J Law Med; 1982; 7(4):393-423. PubMed ID: 7102678 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The legal side. "Do not feed...". Cushing M Am J Nurs; 1983 Apr; 83(4):602-4. PubMed ID: 6551143 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Withholding treatment from defective newborns: a description of Canadian practices. Magnet JE Leg Med Q; 1980; 4():271-92. PubMed ID: 10258798 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Legal recognition of neocortical death. Smith DR Cornell Law Rev; 1986 May; 71(4):850-88. PubMed ID: 10277439 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. A critique of Louisiana's approach to withholding medical treatment from defective newborns. Goichman G South Univ Law Rev; 1983; 9(2):157-84. PubMed ID: 11652508 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Defective newborns: inconsistent application of legal principles emphasized by the Infant Doe case. Baumgardner KL Tex Tech Law Rev; 1983; 14(3):569-91. PubMed ID: 11651729 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. An attempt to regulate medical decision making. Culliton BJ Clin Res; 1983 Oct; 31(4):434-8. PubMed ID: 10263139 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The forgotten rights of defective newborns. Ornell CT Health Matrix; 1983; 1(2):59-62. PubMed ID: 10263334 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Treating defective newborns: who decides? On what basis? Boyle JM Hosp Prog; 1982 Aug; 63(8):34-7, 61. PubMed ID: 10256256 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The legal aspects of withdrawing nourishment. Horan DJ; Grant ER J Leg Med; 1984 Dec; 5(4):595-632. PubMed ID: 6394680 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Medical treatment of defective newborns: an answer to the "Baby Doe" dilemma. Shapiro RS Harvard J Legis; 1983; 20(1):137-52. PubMed ID: 11651781 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The second Baby Doe rule. Kopelman LM JAMA; 1988 Feb; 259(6):843-4. PubMed ID: 3336197 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Terminating artificial feeding for dying infants: ethics, emotions, and societal impact. Rhoden NK Death Educ; 1984; 8(5-6):405-12. PubMed ID: 10310934 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Legal and ethical issues concerning treatment of seriously ill newborns. Johnson V Loyola Law Rev; 1985; 30(4):925-51. PubMed ID: 11651874 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Symposium: 3. Legislation is likely to create more difficulties than it resolves. Havard J J Med Ethics; 1983 Mar; 9(1):18-20. PubMed ID: 6834397 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]