Regulating the new reproductive technologies: a cross-channel comparison.
作者信息
Latham Melanie
出版信息
Med Law Int. 1998;3(2-3):89-115. doi: 10.1177/096853329800300301.
PMID:11657600
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Regulating the new reproductive technologies: a cross-channel comparison.
Med Law Int. 1998;3(2-3):89-115. doi: 10.1177/096853329800300301.
2
The law and assisted reproduction in the United Kingdom and United States.英国和美国的法律与辅助生殖
J Law Health. 1994;9(1):135-61.
3
Prisoners of progress or hostages to fortune?进步的囚徒还是命运的人质？
J Law Med Ethics. 1993 Spring;21(1):30-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.1993.tb01228.x.
4
The British law on assisted reproduction: a liberal law by comparison with many other European laws.
Ethics Med. 1996;12(2):41-5.
5
The regulation of assisted conception in England.英国辅助生殖的监管
Eur J Health Law. 1994;1(1):53-79. doi: 10.1163/157180994x00394.
6
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990.1990年《人类受精与胚胎学法案》
Bull Med Ethics. 1990 Nov;No. 63:13-21.
7
Medico-legal aspects of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer practice.体外受精与胚胎移植操作的法医学问题
Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1987 Jul;41(7):405-13.
8
A wish to have a baby and the dignity of the child and embryo: about the law on artificial insemination and embryo protection of the Republic of Estonia.生育愿望与儿童及胚胎的尊严：关于爱沙尼亚共和国人工授精和胚胎保护法
Eur J Health Law. 1998 Jun;5(2):191-201. doi: 10.1163/15718099820522434.
9
Austria: a legal ban on surrogate mothers and fathers?
J Fam Law. 1992;31(2):267-82.
10
Bending the statutory rules: the case of Mrs. Blood.违反法定规则：布拉德夫人案
Health Care Anal. 1997 Sep;5(3):238-240, 243. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1042(199709)5:3<237::aid-hca234>3.0.co;2-5.
引用本文的文献
1
Doing and undoing nation through ART: a Franco-American comparison.通过艺术塑造与解构国家：法美比较
Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2020 Oct 14;11:65-72. doi: 10.1016/j.rbms.2020.09.005. eCollection 2020 Nov.
2
Pre-persons, commodities or cyborgs: the legal construction and representation of the embryo.
Health Care Anal. 2000;8(2):171-88. doi: 10.1023/A:1009406729739.
Zotero 插件