114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11645443)
1. The Spring case and the importance of interdisciplinary dialogue.
Cranford RE
Medicoleg News; 1981 Feb; 9(1):17. PubMed ID: 11645443
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Medico-legal implications of "orders not to resuscitate.
Tecklenburg N
Cathol Univers Law Rev; 1982; 31(3):515-37. PubMed ID: 11649468
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Matter of Storar; Eichner v. Dillon.
New York. Court of Appeals
North East Rep Second Ser; 1981 Mar; 420():64-80. PubMed ID: 12041255
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The Eichner/Storar decision: a year's perspective.
Dunn LJ
Law Med Health Care; 1982 Jun; 10(3):117-119, 141. PubMed ID: 11643893
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. In re Storar: the right to die and incompetent patients.
Colabrese CA
Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 1982; 43(4):1087-107. PubMed ID: 11658613
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Safeguarding euthanasia.
Helme T; Padfield N
New Law J; 1992 Oct; 142(6573):1335-6. PubMed ID: 11659650
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The preservation of life and self-determination.
McCormick RA; Veatch RM
Theol Stud; 1980 Jun; 41(2):390-6. PubMed ID: 11661994
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Substituted judgment and the terminally-ill incompetent.
Santurri EN; Werpehowski W
Thought; 1982 Dec; 57(227):484-501. PubMed ID: 11649637
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Cruzan and its impact on patient self-determination.
Gilbert LJ
J Fam Law; 1991-1992; 30(1):111-33. PubMed ID: 11659441
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Deciding right-to-die cases involving incompetent patients: Jones v. Saikewicz.
Schultz S; Swartz W; Appelbaum JC
Suffolk Univ Law Rev; 1977; 11(4):936-58. PubMed ID: 11664848
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The limits of proxy decisionmaking for incompetents.
Buchanan AE
UCLA Law Rev; 1981; 29(2):386-408. PubMed ID: 11660397
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. In re Quinlan: one court's answer to the problem of death with dignity.
Falck DP
Wash Lee Law Rev; 1977; 34(1):285-308. PubMed ID: 11663016
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Decisions not to treat: the Saikewicz case and its aftermath.
Glantz LH; Swazey JP
Bull Am Coll Physicians; 1979 Jan; 2(1):22-32. PubMed ID: 11661768
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Setting euthanasia on the level.
Helme T; Padfield N
Liverp Law Rev; 1993; 15(1):75-92. PubMed ID: 11659679
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Cruzan v. Harmon and the dangerous claim that others can exercise an incapacitated patient's right to die.
Ellman IM
Jurimetrics; 1989; 29(4):389-401. PubMed ID: 11652559
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The Saikewicz decision.
N Engl J Med; 1978 May; 298(21):1208. PubMed ID: 651960
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The issue of personal choice: the competent incurable patient and the right to commit suicide?
Morgan RC; Marks TC; Harty-Golder B
Miss Law Rev; 1992; 57(1):1-49. PubMed ID: 11651516
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Medical decisionmaking for incompetent persons: the Massachusetts substituted judgment model.
Dunphy SM; Cross JH
West New Engl Law Rev; 1987; 9(1):153-67. PubMed ID: 11649910
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Informed consent and the dying patient.
Montange CH
Yale Law J; 1974 Jul; 83(8):1632-64. PubMed ID: 11664418
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Is there a right to die?
Grad FP
Columbia J Law Soc Probl; 1976; 12(4):489-529. PubMed ID: 11663026
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
