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 *

166 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9687749)

  • 1. The right to say no.
    Ferguson P
    Nurs Times; 1998 Jun 10-16; 94(23):28-30. PubMed ID: 9687749
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Inside the womb, outside the law.
    Murphy D
    Nurs Times; 1998 Jun 10-16; 94(23):32. PubMed ID: 9687751
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The right to choose.
    Savage W
    Nurs Stand; 1998 May 20-26; 12(35):14. PubMed ID: 9687689
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Whose body is it, anyway?
    Hewson B
    Nurs Stand; 1997 May; 11(35):18. PubMed ID: 9239007
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. What happened to the midwife in the case of the woman forced to have a caesarean.
    Cronk M
    Nurs Times; 1998 May 20-26; 94(20):18. PubMed ID: 9661457
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An upside-down world?
    Hewson B
    Mod Midwife; 1997 May; 7(5):18-9. PubMed ID: 9224034
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Refusal of invasive obstetrical intervention and the patient's right law].
    Peleg D; Ben-Rafael Z
    Harefuah; 1997 Jul; 133(1-2):50-1. PubMed ID: 9332060
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Whose rights supersede, those of the patient or those of the unborn fetus?
    Cady RF
    JONAS Healthc Law Ethics Regul; 1999 Mar; 1(1):7-9. PubMed ID: 10823985
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The legal aspects of sterilisation. Part 2.
    Dimond B
    Mod Midwife; 1997 Jun; 7(6):20-1. PubMed ID: 9233223
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The midwife and moral dilemma.
    Barki PA
    Midwifery Today Childbirth Educ; 1997; (41):57-8. PubMed ID: 9136427
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Human rights, reproductive freedom, medicine and the law.
    McLean SA; Ramsey J
    Med Law Int; 2002; 5(4):239-58. PubMed ID: 14983883
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Court-ordered caesarean sections: few norms.
    Smith AW; Rosen BF
    Healthspan; 1989 Dec; 6(11):9-11. PubMed ID: 10296558
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mother v. fetus--the case of "do or die": in re A.C.
    Snyder DB
    J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1989; 5():319-37. PubMed ID: 10293012
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The Canadian Charter as a barrier to unwanted medical treatment of pregnant women in the interests of the foetus.
    Jackman M
    Health Law Can; 1993; 14(2):49-58. PubMed ID: 10131254
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Court-ordered cesarean sections receive judicial defeat.
    Curran WJ
    N Engl J Med; 1990 Aug; 323(7):489-92. PubMed ID: 2082954
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Delivering justice.
    Andrews A
    Nurs Times; 1998 Jun 10-16; 94(23):31-2. PubMed ID: 9687750
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Forced medical treatment in pregnancy: resolving the conflicting rights of mother and fetus.
    Meyer KC
    Med Staff Couns; 1990; 4(1):53-8. PubMed ID: 10104769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Water births: client choice versus legal implications.
    Street D
    Nurs Times; 1997 Nov 5-11; 93(45):50-2. PubMed ID: 9407888
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Women's rights versus the protection of fetuses.
    Warren MA
    Midwest Med Ethics; 1991; 7(1):1, 3-7. PubMed ID: 16145788
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Prenatal v. parental rights: what a difference an "a" makes.
    Gallagher A
    St Marys Law J; 1989; 21(2):301-24. PubMed ID: 16100799
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.