Patient Status: The Foetus and the Pregnant Woman

Australian Journal of Human Rights

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 229-241

  McLean, Sheila A M ^a   Petersen, Kerry ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85045342106     PISSN: 1323238X     EISSN: 2573573X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1323238X.1996.11910957     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Asche M “Law-Language of Maternity: Discourse Holding Nature in Contempt” (1988) 22 New England uiw Review 521-551.
2. Meckenzie TB, Nagel TC and Rolhman, BJ K “When a Pregnant Woman Endangen Her Foetus” (1986) 16 (1) Hastings CemerReport 24, 25.
3. Wells C “Maternal Versus Foetal Rights” (1992) Working Paper No.I Feminist Legal Research Unit, University of Liverpool, 17 at 18-19.
4. Bennett B “The Pregnant Woman and the Duty to Rescue: A Feminist Response to the Fetal Rights Debate” (1991) 9 (1) Lawin Contexl 10, 85.
5. Kolder VEB, Gallagher J and Parsons MT “Court-Ordered Obstetrical Interventions” (1987) New England Journal of Medicine 1192 at 1194.
6. Johnsen D “The Creation of Fetal Rights: Conflicts with Women’s Constitutional Rights to Liberty, Privacy and Equal Protection” (1986) 95 Yale Law Journal 599.
7. Poplanski N and Gillett G (1991) “Ethics and Embryos” 17 Journal of Medical Ethics 62.
8. McCullough LB and Chernevak FA (1994) Ethics in Obstetrics and Gynecology OUP, Oxford 100-101.
9. Malene v Shulman (1990) 67 DLR (4th) 321, 336.
10. McLean SAM A Patienl ‘s Righi to Know (1989) Dartmouth, Aldershot, chaps 3 & 4.
11. McLean SAM and McKay A J “Consent in Medical Practice” in McLean SAM (ed) Legal Issues in Medicine, Gower Aldershot, 1981.
12. Brazier M “Medicine, Patients and the Law” 1992 (2nd ed) Penguin, UK 73.
13. Seymour J Fetal Welfare and the Law (1995)
14. Seymour J “A Pregnant Woman’s Decision to Decline Treatment: How Should the Law Respond?” (1994) 2 Journal of Law and Medicine 27.
15. SeeAnomey-General (Qld) (Ex rel Kerr) v T (1986) 46 ALR 275, 277;
16. Paton v British Pregnancy Advisory Service (1979) QB 276, 279;
17. Roe v Wade 410 US I 13, 161-162 (1973).
18. ElliotvJoicey (1935) SC (HL) 57
19. Karpin I “Legislating the Female Body: Reproductive Technology and the Reconstructured Woman” (1993) 3 Columbia Jounal of Gender and Law 325 at 329.
20. Seymour (1995) Columbia Jounal of Gender and Law 56.
21. Dworkin R Life’s Dominion Harper Collins 1993 chap 2.
22. Singer P Rethinking life and Death (1994) Text Publishing Company, Australia, 180-183
23. Swartz M “Pregnant Woman v Fetus: A Dilemma for Hospital Ethics Committees” (1992) Cambridge Quarterly Healthcare Ethics 51 at 53.
24. McCullough, Chervenak, “Pregnant Woman v Fetus: A Dilemma for Hospital Ethics Committees” (1992) Cambridge Quarterly Healthcare Ethics 51 at 102.
25. McCullough, Chervenak, “Pregnant Woman v Fetus: A Dilemma for Hospital Ethics Committees” (1992) Cambridge Quarterly Healthcare Ethics 51 at 103-4.
26. McCullough, Chervenak, “Pregnant Woman v Fetus: A Dilemma for Hospital Ethics Committees” (1992) Cambridge Quarterly Healthcare Ethics 51 at 104.
27. Maningly S S “The Maternal-Fetal Dyad: Exploring the Two-Patient Obstetric Model” (1992) 22 No 1 Hastings CemerRepot 113.
28. Annas G “She’s Going to Die: The Case of Angela C” Vol.18 No.1 (1988) Hastings Center Report 23, 24.
29. Swartz “She’s Going to Die: The Case of Angela C” Vol.18 No.1 (1988) Hastings Center Report 56.
30. Ruddick W, Wilcox W, “Operating on the Fetus” (1982) 12 Hastings Center Report 12.
31. Swartz “Operating on the Fetus” (1982) 12 Hastings Center Report 55.
32. Annas, G “Protecting the Liberty of Pregnant Patients” (1987) 316 New Eng J M
33. Annas (1988) “Protecting the Liberty of Pregnant Patients” (1987) 316 New Eng J M 25.
34. Draper H “Women, Forced Caesarian and Antenatal Responsibilities” Worlcing Paper No.I, (1992) Feminist Legal Reacarch Unit, Univenity of Liverpool, 12.